BX  7321    .R68  1913 
Rowe,   John  F.,  1827-1897. 
A  history  of  reformatory 
movement  s 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arcliive 
in  2014 


littps://arcliive.org/details/liistoryofreformaOOrowe_0 


A  HISTTORY 


OF 


Reformatory  Movements, 


RESULTING  IN  A 


RESTORATION  OF  THE  i^POSTOLIC  CHURCH; 

TO  WHICH   IS  APPENDED  A 

HISTORY  OF  TH£  NINETEEN  GENERAL  CHURCH  COUNCILS, 

ALSO  A 

History  of  All  Innovations,  from  ths  Third  Century  Down. 
By  JOHN  F.  ROWE. 


NINTH  EDITION 
(Revised  and  Enlarged.) 


F. 


CINCINNATI: 
L.  ROWE,  PUBLISHER. 
1913. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  18S9,  by 
JOHN  F.  ROWE, 
in  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress  at  Washington,  D.  C. 


PREFACE. 


In  preparing  this  work  for  the  public,  we  have  drawn  from  the  most 
reliable  and  distinguished  authorities  eitant.  We  have  prepared  the 
work  with  much  labor  and  patient  research.  The  present  work  is  the 
condensation  of  many  volumes.  For  authorities,  we  have  depended 
on  such  standard  works  as  McClintock  and  Strong's  Encyclopedia,  Ency- 
clopedia- Britannica,  Chambers'  Encyclopedia.,  Prof.  George  P.  Fisher's 
History  of  the  Reformation,  Philip  Schaff's  History  of  the  Christian  Church, 
Neander's  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  and  Prof.  R. 
Richardson's  Memoirs  of  Alexander  Campbell.  In  delineating  the  devel- 
opmeat  of  the  great  apostasy  from  the  original  apostolic  order  of 
things,  in  describing  the  successive  Protestant  reformations,  in  setting 
forth  the  restoration  and  identification  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  as 
accomplished  through  the  labors  of  Alexander  Campbell  and  his  coad- 
jutors, and  in  giving  a  brief  history  of  the  nineteen  Ecumenical 
Church  Councils,  we  have  followed  the  order  of  events  as  closely  as  it 
was  possible  to  be  done.  We  have  aimed  to  give  places,  dates,  and 
authorities,  and  corroborating  testimony  from  disinterested  parties. 
In  a  word,  if  there  is  any  reliability  in  history,  it  will  be  found  in  the 
following  pages.  We  have  aimed  to  present  a  systematic  compendium 
of  Reformatory  Movements,  and  as  such  we  ask  our  readers  to  receive 
our  work,  bating  all  imperfections,  as  purely  a  labor  cf  love. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Fob  many  years  the  writer  has  himself  felt  the  pressing  need  of  a 
work  of  this  character.  While  young  in  the  ministry,  and  compara- 
tively poor,  in  possession  of  very  few  books,  and  having  no  access  to 
large  libraries,  he  continually  felt  himself  hampered  by  the  absence  of 
books  of  reference,  and  felt  himself  crippled  in  his  public  ministra- 
tions because  he  could  not  find  time,  in  his  struggles  to  live  above 
want,  to  ransack  the  pages  of  history  in  quest  of  the  desired  informa- 
tion. The  general  reader  needs  just  such  a  work  as  this,  who,  in  a 
moment,  by  referring  to  the  index,  can  find  what  he  wants  and  satisfy 
himself.  The  preacher  needs  it  for  easy  reference,  and  especially  the 
traveling  evangelist,  who  can  not  pack  a  lot  of  books  with  him.  The 
author  of  this  work,  having  frequently  desired  a  help  of  this  kind, 
which  he  could  carry  with  him,  to  aid  him  both  in  speaking  and  writ- 
ing for  the  press,  came  to  the  conclusion  that  others  might  be  greatly 
benefited  by  the  matter  contained  in  it.  The  author  has  for  a  long 
time  had  such  a  work  in  contemplation.  It  is  not  only  intended  for 
the  Disciples  of  Christ,  but  it  is  also  prepared  with  a  view  of  circula- 
ting it  among  the  various  denominations,  and  with  the  purpose  of 
inciting  the  independent  and  untrammeled  thinkers  in  the  denomina- 
tions to  investigate  the  pages  of  history  to  see  if  these  things  are  so. 

Within  the  compass  of  this  work,  we  have  aimed  to  give  a  connected 
view  of  the  Reformatory  Movements  from  Martin  Luther  down  to  the  / 
times  of  the  great  reformer,  Alexander  Campbell.  The  reader  will 
discover  the  fact,  that  while  such  illustrious  reformers  as  Luther, 
Zwingli,  Melancthon,  Calvin,  Knox  and  Wesley  only  aimed  at 
re-forming  existing  abuses  and  immoralities  in  the  Churcli,  Campbell 
sought  the  complete  restoraiion  of  apostolic  principles  and  practices, 

(V) 


vi 


INTRODUCTION. 


and,  having  determined  upon  a  work  of  that  character,  did  actually 
raise  up  a  body  of  people  identical  with  primitive  Christians,  both  in 
faith  and  practice.    The  plan  of  the  work  is  as  foUows  : 

1.  A  brief  statement  of  the  primitive  order  of  things.  2.  A  sketch 
of  the  apostasy  from  the  third  century  down  to  the  times  of  Luther,  or 
to  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century.  3.  A  connected  history 
of  the  Protestant  period,  which  embraces  the  efforts  made  at  reforma- 
tion during  the  space  of  three  hundred  years.  4.  The  Restoration 
of  the  Apostolic  Church.  5.  A  history  of  the  nineteen  Ecumenical 
Church  Councils — the  study  of  the  proceedings  of  which  is  highly 
instructive  and  interesting,  they  serying  as  a  sort  of  spiritual  thermom- 
eter of  the  troublous  times  of  the  Church,  as  the  Church  was  manipu- 
lated by  princes  and  priests.  The  yarious  decrees  of  successive 
councils  will  show  how  kings  and  princes  were  deposed,  the  rivalries 
of  ambitious  men  in  Church  and  State,  the  origin  of  image  worship, 
auricular  confession,  penance,  the  mass,  celibacy,  purgatory,  prayers 
for  the  dead,  transubstantiation,  etc.  The  subjects  we  have  enumer- 
ated should  be  studied  as  they  are  not  studied  in  these  days  of  flashy 
literature  and  fast  living.  There  is  entirely  too  much  superficial  read- 
ing done,  even  by  ministers  of  the  gospel,  who  should  be  in  possession 
of  a  general  knowledge  of  church  history,  without  which  they  will  feel 
themselves  more  or  less  annoyed  and  crippled  in  their  ministerial 
work.  People  who  profess  to  be  reformers  can  not  very  well  progress 
as  reformers  unless  they  have  an  intelligent  view  of  the  situation,  as 
we  have  outlined  it  in  this  work.  The  general  reader,  engaged  in 
secular  employments,  who  has  not  the  time  to  explore  the  pages  of 
many  volumes,  and  not  even  time  to  consult  books  of  reference,  wil' 
we  feel  confident,  find  this  work  of  great  advantage  to  him  ;  that  it  w  /( 
aid  him  very  much  in  ascertaining  the  facts  of  history,  and  furaish 
him  with  facts  and  data  with  which  to  make  just  comparison  between 
truth  and  error,  between  what  God  has  decreed,  and  what  man  has 
invented,  and  especially  show  him  the  difference  between  reforming 
imperfect  church  organizations  and  restoring  the  Cb''..<h  of  Christ  as 
founded  by  the  apostles. 


INTRODUCTION. 


vii 


We  should  probably  apologize  to  the  general  reader  for  investing 
portions  of  this  work  with  a  show  of  too  much  learning  and  too  much 
refined  scholarship ;  but  we  found  it  impossible  to  prepare  a  work  of 
this  character — which  is  history  condensed — and  dress  it  up  in  a  simple 
garb  of  words  and  terms  of  speech,  without  marring  more  or  less  the 
pages  of  history,  and  without  doing  injustice  to  the  subjects  treated 
and  to  the  authors  quoted. 

If  the  reader  shall  derive  as  much  benefit  and  pleasure  in  perusing 
these  pages,  as  the  author  has  derived  from  the  preparation  of  the 
work,  the  author  will  feel  that  he  has  not  labored  in  vain. 

In  revising  The  Apostolic  Church  Restored,  whicli  has  been  before  the 
public  several  years,  we  have  enlarged  the  work  considerably  by  add- 
ing to  it  a  History  of  All  Innovations,  on  which  we  have  bestowed 
much  attention,  by  a  searching  investigation  of  the  most  reliable 
authorities,  being  careful  to  furnish  times,  places  and  names.  Our 
foot-notes  are  very  copious.  As  supplemented  to  Tlie  Apostolic  Church 
Restored,  the  History  of  AU  Innovations  will  prove  to  be  of  immense 
value  to  the  reader,  especially  to  the  preacher  and  to  journalists.  The 
documents  to  which  we  have  had  access  in  the  preparation  of  this  work 
are  not  accessible  to  the  general  reader ;  indeed,  the  facts  are  not  access- 
ible to  many  scholars.  By  tracing  up  the  origin  of  the  various  denom- 
inations— which  an  apostate  Church  has  spawned  upon  the  world — and 
by  locating  the  origin  of  all  innovations  from  the  fourth  century  down 
to  the  present,  we  have  identified  the  Church  of  Christ  as  established 
by  the  apostles. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


CONTENTS. 

PAGE. 

Preface   Hi 

iNTRODUCrriON   V 

Contents   ix 


FIRST  PART. 

HISTORY  OF  REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 

The  Primitive  Church   1 

Union  of  Church  and  State   6 

Conflict  between  Church  and  State   9 

Culmination  of  the  Papacy   12 

The  Papacy  and  Episcopacy.   17 

Leo  X.  AND  Luther   21 

The  Dawn  of  the  Reformation   24 

The  Mystics   27 

Luther  and  the  Man  of  Sin   30 

Origin  of  the  Augsburg  Confession   38 

Reformation  in  Switzerland   45 

Origin  of  the  Heidelberg  Confession   49 

John  Calvin  and  Calvinism   53 

Origin  of  the  Church  of  England   61 

The  Thirty-Nine  Articles   65 

The  Book  of  Common  Prayer   70 

Origin  of  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith   77 

Origin  of  Congregationalism   85 

American  Congregationalism   88 

(ix) 


X  CONTENTS. 

PAGE. 

Origin  of  the  Baptist  Church   93 

The  Baptist  Church  in  the  United  States   103 

Origin  OF  Methodism   110 

Origin  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church   114 

Wesley  not  a  Methodist   119 

The  Reformation  of  the  Nineteenth  Century   127 

Attempts  at  Reformation   135 

The  Word  of  God  the  Sole  Rule  of  Action   139 

Attempts  at  Christian  Union   144 

Fundamental  Principles   148 

The  Restoration    152 

The  Bible  the  Only  Creed   159 

Alexander  Campbell  Abandons  Sectarianism   162 

Alexander  Campbell  Unites  with  the  Baptists   168 

A  Similar  Reformation  in  Kentucky   175 

The  Church  of  Christ  Identified   181 

The  Restoration  of  Apostolic  Christianity   189 

History  of  Church  Councils   195 

Apostolic  Council   197 

Council  of  Nice   198 

The  Nicene  Creed   203 

Councils  of  Constantinople   208 

General  Council  of  Ephesus   211 

Council  of  Chalcedon   213 

The  Second  Council  of  Nice   217 

Lateran  Councils   221 

The  Councils  OF  Ly'ons   237 

Councils  of  Vienne   237 

Council  of  Constance   240 

The  Council  at  Basle   241 

Council  of  Trent   245 


CONTENTS. 


xi 


SECOND  PART. 
THE  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH  AND  INNOVATIONS. 

Holy  Water   255 

Fast  of  Lent   262 

Origin  of  Monastic  Vows,  Priestly  Vestments  and  the 

Sign  of  the  Cross   265 

Origin  of  the  Mass  and  Celibacy   270 

Praying  for  the  Dead   277 

Purgatory  and  Paschal  Candles   284 

The  Beginning  of  Popery   288 

Invocation  of  Saints   295 

The  Eucharist   296 

Images  and  Extreme  Unction   299 

Universal  Bishop   304 

Sacrifices  for  the  Dead  ;   308 

Unction  and  Wax  Candles   310 

Feasts  of  All  Saints   313 

Election  of  Bishops  by  Emperors   316 

Introduction  of  Instrumental  Music   318 

Private  Masses   323 

Images  in  Public  Worship   326 

The  Real  Presence   328 

Assumption  of  Temporal  Power   331 

Tradition  Placed  on  a  Level  with  Divine  Revelation  ....  338 

Canonization  of  Saints   34& 

Baptizing  Bells — Absolution   342 

Penance   345 

Redemption  of  Penances   346 

Compulsory  Celibacy   349 

Monasticism   354 

The  Seven  Sacraments   357 

Auricular  Confession   361 

Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent   363 


Xii  CONTENTS. 

Elevation  of  the  Host   367 

Bible  Forbidden  to  the  Laity   371 

Red  Hats,  Scarlet  Cloaks,  Corpus  Christi   372 

Indulgences   380 

The  Papal  Primacy   384 

Rosary  of  the  Virgin  Mary   386 

Immaculate  Conception   388 

Sale  of  Indulgences   394 

Council  of  Trent  and  Tradition   396 

Mortal  Sin  and  Venial  Sin   403 

Papal  Usurpations   405 

The  Pope  Supreme  Bishop   408 

Bull  of  Pope  Pius  IV   413 

Private  Interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  Prohibited  ....  418 
The  Holy  Mother  Church  Alone  Interprets  the  Sciapruui>  t25 

History  of  Infant  Baptism   432 

Origin  of  Infant  Baptism   438 

Validity  of  Baptism   444 

History  of  Sprinkling   451 

History  of  Sprinkling  Continued   457 

History  OF  Infant  Baptism  Continued   463 


THIRD  PART. 

THE  ARGUMENT  OF  CONCESSION. 

Immersion  the  Only  Apostolic  Baptism   471 

Pedobaptist  Authorities   477 

Testimony  of  the  Encyclopedias   484 

Testimony  of  the  Commentators   488 

Testimony  of  the  Commentators  Continued   493 


SUPPLEMENTARY. 

Infant  Baptism   499 

.Baptism  of  Infants   508 


— OF — 

Reformatory  Movements. 


FIRST  PART. 


HISTORY  OP 


Reformatory  Moyemeuts. 


THE  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH. 


One  essential  feature  of  Protestantism  was  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  authority  of  the  hierarchical  order.  In  its 
mature  form,  as  all  history  attests,  the  Reformation  of 
the  sixteenth  century  was  a  rejection  of  Papal  and 
priestly  authority.  As  antecedent  to  the  rise  of  the 
Reformation,  we  propose  to  write  on  the  origin  and 
progressive  development  of  the  hierarchical  system.  The 
Papacy  began  by  invading  the  personal  rights  and  pre- 
rogatives of  the  disciples  of  Christ,  who  stood  upon  a 
common  plane  of  equality,  and  by  instituting  a  media- 
torial priesthood,  which,  setting  aside  the  office  of  the 
great  Mediator,  assumed  to  mediate  between  God  and 
man.  It  was  an  invasion  of  that  order  of  heaven,  as 
recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  which  gave  liberty  to 
the  soul  and  direct  access  to  the  Heavenly  Father  through 
the  one  High  Priest  of  our  salvation.  The  rise  of  sacer- 
dotalism destroyed  the  equality  of  discipleship.  The 
disciples  of  Christ,  under  apostolic  teaching,  formed  a 
community  of  brethren,  who  were  associated  upon  a 
uroad  basis  of  equality,  all  of  them  being  illuminated  and 


2 


THE  PRIMITIVE  CHUKCH. 


directed  and  united  in  the  one  Spirit.  Their  organiza- 
tion under  Christ  was  a  marvel  of  simplicity,  and  very 
unlike  that  hierarchical  system  which  in  subsequent 
times  overshadowed  the  Church  of  the  living  God — very 
dissimilar  from  the  individual  congregation  where  all  the 
members  served  each  other  in  love  and  faith. 

The  New  Testament  records  the  fact  that  all  Chris- 
tians, in  a  given  locality,  were  united  in  one  society,  or 
ecclesia,  the  old  Greek  term  for  an  assembly  legally 
called  and  authorized.  In  each  society  there  was  a 
board  of  pastors,  indifferently  called  elders,  presbyters 
— a  name  taken  from  the  synagogue — or  interchange- 
ably styled  bishops,  overseers,  a  name  given  by  the 
Greeks  to  persons  charged  with  a  guiding  oversight  in 
civil  administration.  In  the  election  of  these  pastors — 
feeders  of  the  flock — the  body  of  disciples  enjoyed  a 
controlling  voice,  although  as  long  as  the  apostles  re- 
mained, their  suggestions  or  appointments  would  natu- 
rally be  accepted.  These  officers  did  not  give  up,  at 
first,  their  secular  employments  ;  they  were  not  even, 
at  the  outset,  intrusted  as  a  peculiar  function  with  the 
business  of  teaching,  which  was  free  to  all,  and  especially 
imposed  upon  a  class  of  persons  who  seemed  designated 
by  their  various  gifts  for  this  work.  The  elders,  with 
the  deacons,  whose  business  it  was  to  l©ok  after  the 
poor  and  to  perform  kindred  duties,  were  the  officers  to 
whom  each  little  separate  community  committed  the 
lead  in  the  management  of  its  affairs.  But,  as  we  ap- 
proach the  close  of  the  second  century,  we  find  marked 
changes ;  some  of  them  of  a  portentous  and  dangerous 
character,  and  as  already  indicative  of  the  fact  that  the 
apostasy  had  set  in.  The  enlargement  of  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  bishops,  by  extending  it  over  dependent  churches 


REFOKMATOKV  MOVEMENTS. 


3 


in  the  neighborhood  of  the  towns  and  cities,  and  the 
multiplying  of  church  officers,  were  innovations  signifi- 
cant of  coming  evils.  By  degrees  church  officers,  by 
assuming  powers  which  did  not  belong  to  them,  grew 
into  a  distinct  order,  and  placed  themselves  above  the 
"  laity  "  as  the  appointed  medium  of  conveying  to  them 
the  grace  of  God.  A  church  in  the  capital  of  a  prov- 
ince, with  its  bishop,  easily  acquired  a  precedence  over 
the  other  churches  and  bishops  in  the  same  district,  and 
thus  the  metropolitan  system  grew  up.  A  higher  grade 
of  eminence  was  accorded  to  the  bishops  and  churches 
of  the  principal  cities,  such  as  Rome,  Alexander  and 
Ephesus;  and  thus  we  have  the  germs  of  a  more 
extended  hierarchical  dominion.  Even  as  early  as  the 
latter  part  of  the  second  century,  the  Church  had  passed 
into  the  condition  of  a  visible,  organized  commonwealth. 
We  find  Irenaeus,  who  was  bishop  of  Lyons  from  177  to 
202,  uttering  the  famous  dictum  that  where  the  Church 
is — m.eaning  the  visible  body  with  its  clergy  and  sacra- 
ments— there  is  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  where  the  Spirit 
of  God  is,  there  is  the  Church.  To  be  cut  off  from  this 
visible  Church  is  to  be  separated  from  Christ.  By  the 
clergy  of  that  period,  this'Church  was  made  the  door  of 
access  to  the  favor  of  God.  We  can  also  readily  account 
for  the  importance  that  began  to  be  attached  to  tradi- 
tion; for  the  defenders  of  the  true  Church  of  Christ 
against  the  corrupting  encroachments  of  gnosticism, 
naturally  fell  back  on  the  historical  evidence  afforded  by 
the  presence  and  testimony  of  the  leading  churches, 
which  the  apostles  themselves  had  planted.  Irenaeus 
and  Tertullian  (the  latter  a  presbyter  at  Carthage,  where 
he  died  between  the  years  220  and  240)  direct  the  in- 
-quirer  to  go  to  Corinth,  Rome,  Ephesus,  to  the  places 


4 


THE  PRIMITIVE  CHUKCH. 


where  the  apostles  had  taught,  and  ascertain  whetlver 
the  novel  speculations  of  the  time  could  justly  claim  the 
sanction  of  the  first  disciples  of  Christ,  or  had  been 
transmitted  from  them. 

Says  a  distinguished  author :  "  It  is  the  pre-eminence 
of  Rome,  as  the  custodian  of  traditions,  that  Irenjeus 
means  to  assert  in  a  noted  passage  (lib.  III.  iii.  2)  in 
which  he  exalts  the  Church."  It  was  not  long  until  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  as  a  visible,  towering  organization, 
was  realized  in  the  unity  of  the  sacerdotal  body.  It 
was  but  a  natural  and  logical  sequence  to  seek  and  find 
a  head  for  this  traditionized  and  secularized  body  ;  and 
where  should  it  be  found  except  in  mystic  Rome,  the 
capital  of  the  world,  the  seat  of  the  predominating 
Church,  where  Paul  had  suffered  martyrdom,  and  where 
many  believed  (but  erroneously)  that  Peter  also  perished 
as  a  martyr.  After  the  sacerdotal  order  had  raised 
Peter  to  be  chief  of  the  apostles,  and  when,  near  the 
close  of  the  second  century,  the  idea  was  suggested  and 
became  current  that  Peter  had  served  as  bishop  of  the 
Roman  Church,  a  strong  foundation  was  laid  in  the 
minds  of  credulous  men  for  a  recognition  of  the  primacy 
of  that  Church  and  of  its  chief  pastor.  The  first  men- 
tion of  Peter  as  bishop  of  Rome  is  found  in  the  Clemen- 
tine Homilies,  which  were  composed  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  second  century.  The  habit  of  thus  deferring  to  the 
See  of  Rome,  as  the  center  of  ecclesiastical  authority,  so 
far  advances  upon  the  credulity  of  the  people,  that  in 
the  middle  of  the  third  century  we  find  Cyprian,  whose 
zeal  for  episcopal  independence  would  not  tolerate  the 
subjection  of  one  bishop  to  another,  still  speaking  of 
that  See  as  the  chief  source  of  sacerdotal  unity.  Rome 
was  a  mighty  and  a  glorious  city.    The  eyes  of  all 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


5 


aiations  were  intently  fixed  upon  it,  as  the  metropolis  of 
wealth  and  splendor  and  political  power.  It  was  an 
easy  thing  to  transfer  this  awe  and  reverence  to  the 
Church  which  had  its  seat  in  the  Eternal  City.  Leo  I., 
with  arrogant  pretensions,  claimed  that  the  Roman  Em- 
pire was  built  with  reference  to  Christianity,  and  that 
Rome,  for  this  reason,  was  chosen  for  the  bishopric  of 
the  chief  of  the  apostles.  Leo  flourished  in  the  fifth 
century. 


UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 


The  accession  of  Constantine  (311)  found  the  Church 
so  firmly  organized  under  its  hierarchy  that  it  could  not 
be  absolutely  merged  in  the  State,  as  might  have  been 
the  result  had  its  constitution  been  different.  But 
under  him  and  his  successors,  the  supremacy  of  the 
State,  with  a  large  control  of  ecclesiastical  affairs,  was 
maintained  by  the  emperors.  General  councils,  for  ex- 
ample, were  convoked  by  them  and  presided  over  by 
their  representatives,  and  conciliary  decrees  published 
as  laws  of  the  Empire.  The  Roman  bishops  felt  it  to 
be  an  honor  to  be  judged  only  by  the  Emperor.  In  the 
closing  period  of  imperial  history,  the  emperors  favored 
the  ecclesiastical  primacy  of  the  Roman  See,  as  a  bond 
of  unity  in  the  Empire.  Political  disorders  and  conflict- 
ing interests  tended  to  elevate  the  position  of  the  Roman 
bishop,  especially  when  he  was  a  person  of  more  than 
ordinary  talents  and  energy.  Leo  the  Great  (zi40-46i), 
the  first,  perhaps,  who  had  conferred  upon  him  the  title 
of  Pope,  proved  himself  a  pillar  of  strength  in  the  midst 
of  tumult  and  anarchy.  His  conspicuous  services,  as  in 
shielding  Rome  from  the  incursions  of  barbarians  and 
protecting  its  inhabitants,  facilitated  the  exercise  of  a 
spiritual  jurisdiction  that  stretched  not  only  over  Italy, 
but  as  far  as  Gaul  and  Africa.  To  him  was  given  by 
Valentinian  III.  (445)  an  imperial  declaration  which 
made  him  supreme  over  the  Western  Church,  or  the 
Church  of  Rome.    We  can  not  follow  the  alternations 

(6) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


7 


of  the  priestly  powers  of  Rome,  nor  consume  space  by 
depicting  the  varying  fortunes  of  popes  and  princes. 
We  can  record  the  fact  that  in  the  fifth  century  the  fall 
of  the  Western  Empire  increased  the  authority  of  the 
bishop  of  Rome  ;  we  can  speak  of  the  spread  of  Moham- 
medanism from  Africa  and  Spain  into  Europe  ;  of  the 
alliance  of  the  Papacy  with  the  Franks  in  750;  of  the 
rescue  of  the  Papacy  by  Pepin  and  Charlemagne,  and  of 
the  coronation  of  the  latter  by  the  hands  of  the  Pope, 
in  the  Basilica  of  St.  Peter,  on  Christmas  Day,  800. 
Taking  advantage  of  the  conflicts  and  disorders  in  the 
empire  of  Charlemagne,  and  seizing  the  opportunity  of 
his  death,  which  created  an  era  of  political  strife  and 
unrest,  the  Roman  bishops  rapidly  began  to  increase  in 
power.  It  was  in  this  period  that  the  False  or  Pseudo- 
Isodorian  Decretals  appeared.  These  false  decretals 
introduced  principles  of  ecclesiastical  law  which  made 
the  Church  dependent  on  the  State,  and  elevated  the 
Roman  See  to  a  position  unknown  to  preceding  ages. 
The  immunity  and  high  prerogatives  of  bishops,  the 
exaltation  of  primates,  as  the  servile  tools  of  the  popes, 
above  metropolitans  who  were  slavishly  dependent  upon 
secular  rulers,  and  the  ascription  of  the  highest  legisla- 
tive and  judicial  functions  to  the  Roman  Pontiff,  were 
some  of  the  leading  and  characteristic  features  of  this 
spurious  collection,  which  found  its  way  into  the  codes 
of  the  canon  law,  and  which  radically  modified  the 
ancient  ecclesiastical  system.  These  false  decretals  first 
appeared  about  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century,  and 
they  only  needed  a  pope  of  sufficient  talents  and  energy 
to  give  practical  effect  to  such  pernicious  principles ; 
and  such  an  instrument  appeared  in  the  person  of  Nich- 
olas I.,  between  the   years  858  and  867,  Availing 


8 


UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 


himself  of  a  favorable  opportunity,  he  brought  Lothair 
II.,  king  of  Lorraine,  under  the  censure  of  the  Church, 
whom,  in  a  case  of  matrimony,  he  compelled  to  submit 
to  the  decrees  of  the  Papacy,  while  at  the  same  time  he 
deposed  the  archbishops  who  had  endeavored  to  thwart 
his  purpose.  At  the  same  time,  Nicholas  humbled 
Hincmar,  the  powerful  archbishop  of  Rheims,  who  had 
disregarded  the  appeal  which  one  of  his  bishops  had 
made  to  Rome. 

According  to  Baronius,  a  distinguished  Roman  Cath- 
olic annalist,  the  anarchical  condition  into  which  the 
Empire  ultimately  fell,  left  the  Papacy,  for  a  century 
and  a  half,  the  prey  of  Italian  factions,  by  the  agency  of 
which  the  papal  office  was  reduced  to  a  lower  point  of 
moral  degradation  than  it  ever  reached  before  or  since. 
This  period  of  moral  and  social  debasement — during  a 
considerable  portion  of  which  time  harlots  disposed  of 
the  papal  office,  and  their  paramours  wore  the  tiara — 
was  interrupted  by  the  intervention  of  the  German  sov- 
ereigns, Otho  I.  and  Otho  II.;  with  the  first  of  whom 
the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  in  the  sense  in  which  the 
name  is  used  in  subsequent  ages,  the  secular  counter- 
part of  the  Papacy,  derives  its  origin.  The  pontiffs 
preferred  the  sway  of  the  emperors  to  that  of  the  lawless 
Italian  barons,  says  Von  Raumer.  This  dark  period, 
in  which  nearly  all  traces  of  apostolic  usages  disappeared, 
was  terminated  by  Henry  III.,  who  appeared  in  Italy  at 
the  head  of  an  army,  and,  in  1046,  at  the  Synod  of 
Sutri,  which  he  had  convoked,  dethroned  three  rival 
popes,  and  raised  to  the  vacant  office  one  of  his  own 
bishops.  The  imperial  ofifice  had  passed  into  the  hands 
of  the  German  kings,  and  they,  like  their  Carlovingian 
predecessors,  whose  acts  in  history  we  have  purposely 
omitted,  rescued  the  Paoacy  from  destruction. 


CONFLICT  BETWEEN  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 


When  we  reach  the  age  of  Hildebrand  (1073-1085), 
we  find  plots  and  counterplots  the  order  of  the  day. 
While  this  pretended  refornner  apparently  sought  a 
thorough  reformation  of  morals  and  a  restoration  of 
ecclesiastical  order  and  sacerdotal  discipline,  he  under- 
took at  the  same  time  to  subordinate  the  State  to  the 
Church,  and  to  subject  the  Church,  such  as  it  was,  to 
the  absolute  authority  of  the  Pope.  The  course  pursued 
by  Hildebrand,  and  by  aspiring  pontiffs  who  succeeded 
him,  in  the  course  of  time  resulted  in  an  open  conflict 
between  the  Papacy  and  the  Empire.  Here  follows  a 
severe  and  persistent  contest,  in  which  the  Papacy  gain 
a  decided  advantage.  That  the  Emperor  was  commis- 
sioned to  preside  over  the  temporal  affairs  of  men,  while 
it  was  left  for  the  Pope  to  guide  and  govern  them  in 
things  spiritual,  was  a  criterion  too  vague  for  defining 
the  limits  of  temporal  and  spiritual  jurisdiction.  The 
co-ordination,  the  equilibrium  of  the  civil  and  ecclesias- 
tical powers,  was  a  relation  with  which,  as  any  one 
might  know,  who  is  conversant  with  the  history  of 
despotic  governments,  neither  party  would  be  content. 
It  was  a  struggle  on  both  sides  for  universal  monarchy. 
The  apostolic  order  of  things  now  completely  fades  out 
of  view.  The  popes,  by  continual  strategy  and  rare 
diplomacy,  gained  an  ascendency  over  Western  Europe, 
and,  for  successive  years,  the  Pope  everywhere  was  the 
acknowledged  head  of  Latin  Christianity.  Sometimes 

(9) 


10 


CONFLICT  BETWEEN  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 


the  Roman  pontiffs,  when  they  saw  an  opportunity  of 
centrahzing  and  consolidating  their  system  of  spiritual 
despotism,  became  the  champions  then,  as  they  have 
frequently  since,  as  suits  their  base  designs,  of  popular 
freedom.  Acting  in  the  role  of  Mephistopheles,  they 
can,  in  turn,  become  republicans,  monarchists,  demo- 
crats, autocrats  and  imperialists,  if  by  such  transforma- 
tion they  can  subserve  the  interests  of  the  Papacy.  The 
end  sanctifies  the  means.  The  humiliation  of  Henry 
IV.  in  1077,  whom  Hildebrand  kept  waiting  during 
three  winter  days,  in  the  garb  of  a  penitent,  in  the  yard 
of  the  castle  of  Canossa,  gives  evidence  of  the  supremacy 
of  the  Papacy  in  the  Medieval  Age.  The  Worms  Con- 
cordat which  Calixtus  II.  concluded  with  Henry  V.  in 
1 122,  and  the  acknowledgment  which  Frederick  Bar- 
barossa  made  of  his  sin  and  error  to  Alexander  III.  at 
Venice,  in  1 177,  after  a  long  contest  for  imperial  prerog- 
atives, are  facts  which  furnish  evidence  of  the  triumph 
of  the  Papacy.  The  triumph  of  the  Papacy  appeared 
complete  when  Gregory  X.  (1271-1276)  directed  the 
electoral  princes  to  choose  an  emperor  within  a  given 
interval,  and  threatened,  in  case  they  refused  compli- 
ance with  the  mandate,  to  appoint,  in  conjunction  with 
his  cardinals,  an  emperor  for  them  ;  and  when  Rudolph 
of  Hapsburg,  whom  they  proceeded  to  select,  acknowl- 
edged in  the  most  unreserved  and  subservient  manner 
the  Pope's  supremacy. 

These  are  strange  developments  of  church  affairs, 
compared  with  the  origin  of  Christianity  and  primitive 
gospel  simplicity.  The  facts  that  we  glean  and  scrap 
from  the  Dark  Ages,  are  the  full  fruitage  of  the  work- 
ings of  the  "mystery  of  iniquity"  alluded  to  by  the 
apostle  Paul.    It  is  impossible  to  furnish  the  details  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


II 


history  within  our  Hmited  space,  but  it  is  our  purpose 
to  give  a  connected  view  of  the  rise  and  development  of 
the  Papacy,  and  to  represent  in  as.  few  words  as  possible 
the  ruin  of  the  ancient  Church,  and  the  subsequent 
growth  of  an  apostate  Church.  And  this  we  do  in 
order  to  show  the  relation  which  Romanism  sustains  to 
Protestantism,  and  the  relation  which  we  sustain  to  both 
these  in  our  plea  for  a  perfectly  restored  Christianity. 
That  there  was  a  remnant  of  the  true  worshipers  of  God 
found  here  and  there  during  the  Dark  Ages,  such  as  the 
Nestorians,  is  a  pleasing  fact  well  established  in  history  ; 
but  that  nearly  all  traces  of  the  primitive  order  of 
things,  as  established  by  the  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ, 
are  lost  sight  of  in  the  raging  conflicts  of  rival  princes 
and  aspiring  ecclesiastics,  both  of  which  powers,  as  they 
alternated  repeatedly  between  victory  and  defeat,  crushed 
down  the  liberties  of  the  people  and  despoiled  them  of 
their  personal  rights,  are  facts  patent  and  intelligible  to 
all  readers  of  history.  We  wish  the  people  of  this 
generation,  as  well  as  the  people  of  succeeding  genera- 
tions, to  know  the  reasons  why  we  stand  apart  from  all 
denominations.  Papal  and  Protestant,  and  why  we  pro- 
pose to  stand  only  upon  apostolic  ground. 


CULMINATION  OF  THE  PAPACY. 


From  the  best  authorities  we  have  consulted,  we  learn 
•that  it  was  during  the  progress  of  the  struggle  with  the 
Empire  that  the  Papal  powers  may  be  said  to  have  cul- 
minated. In  the  period  between  1198  and  1216,  in 
which  Innocent  III.  reigned,  the  Papal  despotism  shone 
forth  in  all  its  ecclesiastical  splendor.  The  enforcement 
of  celibacy  had  placed  the  entire  body  of  the  clergy  in 
a  closer  relation  to  the  sovereign  Pontiff.  The  Vicar  of 
Peter  had  become  the  Vicar  of  God  and  of  Christ.  The 
idea  of  a  theocracy  on  earth,  in  which  the  Pope  should 
presumptuously  rule  in  this  character,  fully  possessed 
the  mind  of  Innocent,  who,  having  profited  by  the  bold- 
ness and  persistency  and  political  finesse  of  Gregory 
VII.,  excelled  the  latter  in  diplomacy  and  political 
strategy.  He  worked  himself  up  to  believe  that  the 
two  swords  of  temporal  and  ecclesiastical  power  had 
both  been  given  to  Peter  and  his  successors,  so  that  the 
earthly  sovereign  derived  his  prerogative  from  the  great 
Head  of  the  Church.  The  Pope  was  constituted  to 
shine  as  the  great  luminary  of  the  world,  and  the  king 
or  civil  ruler  could  only  shine  from  borrowed  light. 
Acting  on  this  theory — the  consummation  of  spiritual 
despotism — Innocent  assumed  the  position  of  arbiter  in 
the  conflicts  of  nations,  and  claimed  the  right  to 
dethrone  kings  and  princes  at  his  pleasure.  We  have 
not  space  to  give  examples  of  his  despotism,  with  which 
the  pages  of  history  are  disgraced. 

(12) 


KEFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


13 


In  the  Church  he  assumed  the  character  of  universal 
bishop,  based  upon  the  theory  that  all  episcopal  power 
was  originally  deposited  in  Peter  and  in  his  successors, 
and  communicated  through  this  source  to  bishops,  who 
were  in  this  manner  constituted  the  only  vicars  of  the 
Pope,  and  who  might  at  any  time  be  deposed  at  the 
will  or  beck  of  the  Pope.  To  him  belonged  all  legisla- 
tive authority,  councils  having  merely  a  deliberate 
power,  while  the  right  to  convoke  them  and  to  ratify  or 
annul  their  proceedings  belonged  exclusively  to  him. 
He  alone,  in  the  role  ot  an  absolute  autocrat,  was 
exempt  from  all  law,  and  might  dispense  with  them  in 
the  case  of  others.  Even  the  doctrine  of  Papal  infalli- 
bility, which  brought  forth  its  legitimate  fruit  in  the 
reign  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  was  discovered  in  the  writings 
of  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  most  eminent  theologian  of 
that  age.  As  the  feudal  system  gradually  gave  way  to 
political  monarchy,  so  the  independency  of  the  churches 
was  absorbed  and  concentrated  in  the  Pope.  The  right 
to  confirm  the  appointment  of  all  bishops,  the  right 
even  to  nominate  bishops  and  to  dispose  of  all  bene- 
fices, the  exclusive  right  of  absolution,  canonization  and 
dispensation,  the  right  to.assess  the  churches — such  were 
some  of  the  iniquitous  prerogatives,  for  the  enforcement 
of  which  Papal  legates,  clothed  with  limitless  powers, 
were  commissioned  to  penetrate  all  the  countries  of 
Europe,  in  order  to  override  the  authority  of  bishops 
and  of  local  ecclesiastical  tribunals.  About  this  time 
originated  the  famous  mendicant  orders  of  St.  Francis 
and  St.  Dominic,  from  which  beggarly  institutions  there 
came  forth  a  swarm  of  itinerant  preachers,  who,  as  the 
pets  of  the  Pope,  were  very  intimately  associated  with 
his  Pontifical  Highness,  and  who  were  ever  ready,  as 


14 


CULMINATION  OF  THE  PAPACY. 


pliant  tools,  to  defend  Papal  prerogatives  and  Papal 
extortions  against  whatever  opposition  might  arise  from 
the  secular  clerg}'.  Insinuating  themselves,  serpent- 
like, within  the  walls  of  the  universities  of  Europe,  they 
defined  and  defended,  in  lectures  replete  with  subtilties 
and  sophistries,  and  by  a  pretended  array  of  scholastic 
wisdom,  all  the  usurpations  of  the  Papacy. 

Conflicts  between  popes  and  temporal  princes  contin- 
ued. The  Papal  assertions  in  regard  to  the  two  swords, 
the  supremacy  of  the  ecclesiastical  over  the  secular 
power,  and  the  subjection  of  every  living  soul  to  the 
Pope,  who  judges  all  and  is  judged  by  none,  were  met 
by  a  united  and  determined  resistance  on  the  part  of 
the  French  people.  When  Boniface  VIII.  summoned 
the  French  clergy  to  Rome  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the 
acts  of  the  king,  the  summons  aroused  a  storm  of  indig- 
nation. The  Papal  Bull,  snatched  from  the  hand  of  the 
legate,  was  publicly  burned  in  Notre  Dame,  on  the  nth 
of  February,  1302.  The  insulted  clergy  of  France  flatly 
denied  the  proposition  that  in  secular  affairs  the  Pope 
stands  above  the  king.  The  prestige  of  the  Papacy  now 
began  to  wane  rapidly.  There  was  an  expansion  of 
knowledge  in  every  direction.  Political  reformers  came 
to  the  front.  Literature  began  to  spread,  and  poets 
and  jurists,  of  learning  and  distinction,  began  to  exert  a 
powerful  influence  in  the  direction  of  civil  and  religious 
libert}'.  Then  comes  the  period  of  the  Babylonian 
captivity,  or  the  long  residence  of  the  Pope  at  Avignon 
— called  the  Babylonian  captivity,  because  it  continued 
about  as  long  as  the  captivity  of  the  Jews  in  ancient 
Babylon — and  the  period  of  the  great  schism,  when, 
during  a  great  part  of  this  period,  the  Papacy  was 
enslaved  to  France,  and  served  the  behests  of  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


15 


French  Court.  Various  forms  of  ecclesiastical  oppres- 
sion followed,  which  involved  German}',  England  and 
other  countries  in  humiliation.  The  revenues  of  the 
Court  at  Avignon  were  supplied  by  means  of  extortions 
and  usurpations  which  had  hitherto  been  without  paral- 
lel. Every  form  of  extortion  was  resorted  to  for  replen- 
ishing the  Papal  treasury.  France  was  willing,  as  long 
as  the  Papacy  remained  her  tool,  to  indulge  the  popes 
in  extravagant  assumptions  of  authority.  Avignon  be- 
came the  headquarters  of  an  extremely  luxurious  and 
profligate  court — a  cesspool  of  vice — the  boundless  im- 
morality of  which  has  been  vividly  depicted  by  Petrarch, 
who  himself  was  an  eye-witness  to  the  shameful  abom- 
inations. Then  arose  the  great  battle  of  the  fourteenth 
century,  between  the  Monarchists  and  the  Papists, 
when  such  celebrated  writers  as  Marsilius  of  Padua, 
William  of  Occam  and  Dante,  as  the  defenders  of  the 
"  Monarchists,"  vigorously  denounced  the  presumptions 
of  the  Papacy.  "These  bold  writings  attacked  the 
collective  hierarchy  in  all  its  fundamental  principles  ; 
they  inquired,  with  a  sharpness  of  criticism  before  un- 
known, into  the  nature  of  the  priestly  office ;  they 
restricted  the  notion  of  heresy,  to  which  the  Church 
had  given  so  wide  an  extension  ;  they  appealed,  finally, 
to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  the  only  valid  authority  in 
matters  of  faith.  As  fervent  monarchists,  these  theolo- 
gians subjected  the  Church  to  the  State.  Their  heret- 
ical tendencies  announced  a  new  process  in  the  minds 
of  men,  in  which  the  unity  of  the  Catholic  Church  went 
down." 

During  the  echism  which  ensued  upon  the  election  of  Urban  VI.,  in 
1378,  there  was  presented  before  Christendom  the  spectacle  of  rival 
popes  imprecating  curses  upon  each  other  ;  each  with  his  court  to  be 


i6 


CULMINATION  OF  THE  PAPACY. 


maintained  by  taxes  and  contributions,  which  had  to  be  largely  in-^ 
creased  on  account  of  the  division.  When  men  were  compelled  to 
choose  between  rival  claimants  of  the  office,  it  was  inevitable  that 
there  should  arise  a  still  deeper  investigation  into  the  origin  and 
grounds  of  Papal  authority.  Inquirers  reverted  to  the  earlier  ages  of 
the  Church,  in  order  to  find  both  the  causes  and  the  cure  of  the  dread- 
ful evils  under  which  Christian  society  was  suffering.  More  than  one 
jurist  and  theologian  called  attention  to  the  ambition  of  the  popes  for 
secular  rule  and  to  their  oppressive  domination  over  the  Church,  as 
the  prime  fountain  of  this  frightful  disorder. — "History  of  tlie  Reforrma-- 
<ton,"  by  Gtorge  P.  Fisher. 


THE  PAPACY  AND  EPISCOPACY. 


A  FRUITLESS  attempt  was  made,  at  about  this  period, 
to  reform  the  Church  "in  head  and  members."  Princes 
interposed  to  make  peace  between  popes,  as  popes  had 
before  interposed  to  produce  peace  between  princes. 
According  to  Laurent  {La  Reforinc),  it  is  the  era  of  the 
reforming  councils  of  Pisa,  Constance  and  Basle,  when, 
largely  under  the  leadership  of  the  Paris  theologians 
(1409-1443),  a  reformation  in  the  morals  and  adminis- 
tration of  the  Church  was  sought  through  the  agency 
of  these  great  assemblies.  It  was  now  a  conflict  for 
supremacy  between  Papacy  and  Episcopacy.  The  Pope 
was  regarded  as  primate  of  the  Church,  but  at  the  same 
time  it  was  asserted  that  bishops  derived  their  grace 
and  authority  for  the  discharge  of  their  office,  not  from 
the  Pope,  but  from  the  same  source  as  that  from  which 
he  derived  his  powers.  It  was  held  that  the  Church, 
when  convened  by  its  representatives  in  a  general  coun- 
cil, is  the  supreme  council,  to  which  the  Pope  himself 
is  subordinate  and  responsible.  "Their  aim,"  says 
Professor  Fisher,  "was  to  reduce  him  to  the  rank  of  a 
constitutional  instead  of  an  absolute  monarch.  The 
Galilean  theologians  held  to  an  infallibility  residing 
somewhere  in  the  Church  ;  most  of  them,  and  ultimately 
all  of  them,  placing  this  infallibility  in  ecumenical  coun- 
cils. The  flattering  hopes  under  which  the  Council  of 
Pisa  opened  its  proceedings,  were  doomed  to  disap- 
pointment, in  consequence  of  the  reluctance  of  the 

3  (>7) 


i8 


THE  PAPACY  AND  EPISCOPACY. 


reformers  to  push  through  their  measures  without  a 
pope,  and  the  failure  of  Alexander  V.  to  redeem  the 
pledges  which  he  had  made  them  prior  to  his  election. 
Moreover,  the  schism  continued,  with  three  popes  in 
the  room  of  two.  The  Council  of  Constance  began 
under  the  fairest  auspices.  The  resolve  to  vote  by  na- 
tions was  a  significant  sign  of  a  new  order  of  things,  and 
crushed  the  design  of  the  flagitious  Pope,  John  XXIII., 
to  control  the  assembly  by  the  preponderance  of  Italian 
votes.  Solemn  declarations  of  the  supremacy  and 
authority  of  the  Council  were  adopted,  and  were  car- 
ried out  in  the  actual  deposition  of  the  infamous  Pope. 
But  the  plans  of  reform  were  mostly  wrecked  on  the 
same  rock  on  which  they  had  broken  at  Pisa.  A  pope 
must  be  elected;  and  Martin  V.,  once  chosen,  by  skill- 
ful management  and  by  separate  arrangements  with 
different  princes,  was  unable  to  undo,  to  a  great  ex- 
tent, the  salutary  work  of  the  Council,  but  before  its 
adjournment  he  reasserted  the  very  doctrine  of  Papal 
superiority  which  the  Council  had  repudiated.  The 
substantial  failure  of  this  Council,  the  most  august  eccle- 
siastical assemblage  of  the  Middle  Ages,  to  achieve 
reforms  which  thoughtful  and  good  men  everywhere 
deemed  indispensable,  was  a  proof  that  some  more  radi- 
cal means  of  reformation  would  have  to  be  adopted. 
But  another  grand  effort  in  the  same  direction  was  put 
forth :  and  the  Council  of  Basle,  notwithstanding  that 
it  adopted  numerous  measures  of  a  beneficent  character, 
which  were  acceptable  to  the  Catholic  nations,  had,  at 
last,  no  better  issue;  for  most  of  the  advantages  that 
were  granted  to  them,  and  the  concessions  that  were 
made  by  the  popes,  especially  to  Germany,  they  con- 
trived afterward,  by  adroit  diplomacy,  to  recall." 


REFORMATORY  MOVLMENTS. 


19 


History  gives  abundant  evidence  of  the  fact  that  no 
good  ever  came  from  human  councils  which  undertook 
to  interfere  with  and  modify  the  doctrine  and  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  of  Christ.  Only  evil,  and  unmiti- 
gated evil,  ever  emanated  from  such  a  source.  The 
fifteenth  century  was  characterized  by  national  rivalries, 
and  by  the  plots  and  counterplots  of  aspiring  princes, 
who  served  the  Papal  cause,  or  compelled  the  Papacy 
to  serve  them,  as  self-interest  might  dictate.  It  is  diffi- 
cult to  tell  which  exercised  the  most  chicanery,  and 
which  practiced  the  most  intrigue,  or  which  sank  to  the 
lowest  depths  to  gain  power — the  civil  or  ecclesiastical 
powers.  One  thing  is  certain,  and  that  is,  that  selfish- 
ness reigned  supreme.  In  illustration  of  this  statement, 
it  is  recorded  that  Innocent  VIII.,  besides  advancing 
the  fortunes  of  seven  illegitimate  children,  and  waging 
two  wars  with  Naples,  received  an  annual  tribute  from 
the  Sultan  for  detaining  his  brother  and  rival  in  prison, 
instead  of  sending  him  to  lead  a  force  against  the  Turks, 
the  enemies  and  despoilers  of  Christendom.  Alexander 
VI.,  whose  deep  depravity  recalls  the  dark  days  of  the 
Papacy  in  the  tenth  century,  busied  himself  in  founding 
a  principality  for  his  favorite  son,  that  monster  of  ini- 
quity, Caesar  Borgia,  and  in  amassing  treasures,  by  base 
and  cruel  means,  for  the  support  of  the  licentious 
Roman  Court.  He  is  said  to  have  died  of  the  poison 
which  he  had  caused  to  be  prepared  for  a  wealthy  car- 
dinal, who  bribed  the  head  cook  to  set  it  before  the 
Pope  himself.  If  Julius  II.  satisfied  the  extortionate 
demands  of  his  relatives  in  a  more  peaceable  way,  he 
still  found  his  enjoyment  in  carnal  war  and  savage  con- 
quest, and  made  it  his  chief  occupation  to  the  States  of 
the  Church.    According  to  the  testimony  of  Gieseler, 


20 


THK  PAPACV  AND  EPISCOPACY. 


the  eminent  German  historian,  he  organized  alliances 
and  defeated  one  enemy  after  another,  forcing  Venice 
to  submit  to  his  outrages,  and  not  hesitating,  old  man 
as  he  was,  to  take  the  field  himself,  in  the  time  of  win- 
ter. In  15  10,  having  brought  in  the  French,  and  having 
joined  the  League  of  Cambray  for  the  sake  of  subduing 
Venice,  he  called  to  his  aid  the  Venetians  for  the  expul- 
sion of  the  French.  The  Church,  and  especially  the 
priesthood  of  Rome,  had  become  thoroughly  demoral- 
ized ;  and  this  was  the  condition  of  things  on  th^  *ve  of 
the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century. 


LEO  X.  AND  LUTHER. 


At  the  opening  of  the  Reformation,  Leo  X.  was 
made  a  cardinal  at  the  age  of  thirteen,  and  elected  Pope 
at  the  age  of  thirty-seven.  He  was  more  '•  familiar  with 
the  fables  of  Greece,  and  the  delights  of  the  poets,  than 
with  the  history  of  the  Church  and  the  doctrine  of  the 
Fathers."  He  indulged  in  profane  studies,  and  gave 
much  of  his  time  to  hunting,  jesting  and  pageants.  He 
sported  in  a  gay  and  luxurious  court,  and  made  religion 
subordinate  to  the  fascinations  of  literature,  art  and 
music.  Vast  sums  of  money,  which  his  religious  sub- 
jects were  obliged  to  contribute,  were  lavished  upon  his 
relatives,  and  the  historian  Ranke  has  characterized  his 
habits  of  life  as  "a  sort  of  intellectual  sensuality." 
Luther  began  his  Reformation  in  the  reign  of  this  cold- 
hearted  Pope.  "During  the  Middle  Ages,"  says 
Coleridge,  "the  Papacy  was  another  name  for  a  con- 
federation of  learned  men  in  the  west  of  Europe  against 
the  barbarians  and  ignorance  of  the  times.  The  Pope 
was  the  chief  of  this  confederacy ;  and,  so  long  as  he 
retained  that  character,  his  power  was  just  and  uTesist- 
ible.  It  was  the  principal  means  of  preserving  lor  us 
and  for  all  posterity  all  that  we  now  have  of  the  illumin- 
ation of  past  ages.  But  as  soon  as  the  Pope  made  a 
separation  between  his  character  as  premier  clerk  in 
Christendom  and  as  a  secular  prince  — as  soon  as  he 
began  to  squabble  for  towns  and  castles— then  he  at 
once  broke  the  charm  and  gave  birth  to  a  revolution. 

(21) 


22 


LEO  X.  AND  LUTHER. 


Everywhere,  but  especially  tliroughout  the  north  of 
Europe,  the  breach  of  feeling  and  sympathy  went  on 
widening ;  so  that  all  Germany,  England,  Scotland  and 
other  countries,  started,  like  giants  out  of  their  sleep, 
at  the  first  blast  of  Luther's  trumpet." — Table  Talk,  July 
24,  1832. 

Coleridge  may  have  seen  a  special  providence  in  the 
rise  of  the  Papacy,  as  a  "confederation  of  learned  men 
in  the  west  of  Europe ;  "  but  we  can  not  see  the  special 
providence.  We  see  the  Papacy,  with  all  its  worldly 
wisdom,  sagacity,  duplicity,  diplomacy;  with  all  its 
arrogance,  assumption  of  power,  corruptions  and  abomi- 
nations. We  also  see  its  downfall  at  the  approach  of 
Bible  knowledge,  apostolic  teaching  and  popular  edu- 
cation. 

The  age  immediately  preceding  the  Lutheran  Refor- 
mation was  characterized  by  the  dogmatic  system,  as 
elaborated  by  the  schoolmen  from  the  abundant  mate- 
rials furnished  by  tradition  and  sanctioned  by  the  mon- 
grel Church  ;  which  constituted  a  vast  body  of  mystic 
and  scholastic  doctrine,  and  which  every  man  of  the 
least  religious  pretensions  was  bound  to  accept  in  all 
particulars,  or  come  under  the  ban  of  excommunication. 
The  polity  of  the  mongrel  Church  lodged  all  ecclesiasti- 
cal rule  in  the  hands  of  a  superior  class,  the  besotted 
priesthood,  who  were  commissioned  as  the  indispensable 
almoners  of  divine  grace.  The  worship  centered  in  the 
sacrifice  of  the  mass,  a  constantly  repeated  miracle 
wrought  by  the  hands  of  the  wily  and  winsome  priest. 
Justification  by  meritorious  works,  without  respect  to 
character  and  a  godly  life,  was  stereotyped  into  a  wicked 
dogma,  which  was  eatmg  out  the  vitals  of  all  religious 
life.    Human  merit  was  substituted  for  the  mercy  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


23 


God.  A  religion  of  external  performances,  which  con- 
sisted in  quantity  rather  than  in  quality,  and  various 
modes  of  pretentious  abstinences,  with  the  institutions 
of  monasticism  and  the  celibacy  of  the  priesthood,  were 
prominent  features  in  the  existing  order  of  things. 
According  to  UUman  {Reformatoren  von  der  Reformatioii), 
the  masses,  pilgrimages,  fastings,  flagellations,  prayers 
to  saints,  homage  to  their  relics  and  images,  and  similar 
features  so  prominent  in  medieval  mysticism,  which  passed 
as  piety,  illustrate  the  essential  character  of  the  times. 

"  The  forerunners  of  the  Reformation  have  been  prop- 
erly divided,"  says  Professor  Fisher,  quoting  from  Dr. 
Ullman,  "into  two  classes.  The  first  of  them  consists 
of  the  men  who,  in  the  quiet  path  of  theological  research 
and  teaching,  or  by  practical  exertions  in  behalf  of  a 
contemplative,  spiritual  tone  of  piety,  were  undermining 
the  traditional  system.  The  second  embraces  names 
who  are  better  known,  for  the  reason  that  they 
attempted  to  carry  out  their  ideas  practically  in  the  way 
of  effecting  ecclesiastical  changes.  The  first  class  are 
more  obscure,  but  were  not  less  influential  in  preparing 
the  ground  for  the  Reformation.  Protestantism  was  a 
return  to  the  Scriptures  as  the  authentic  source  of  Chris- 
tian knowledge,  and  to  the  principle  that  salvation,  that 
inward  peace,  is  not  from  the  Church  or  from  human 
works,  ethical  or  ceremonial,  but  through  Christ  alone, 
received  by  the  soul  in  an  act  of  trust.  Whoever, 
whether  in  the  chair  of  theology,  in  the  pulpit,  through 
the  devotional  treatise,  or  by  fostering  the  study  of 
languages  and  of  history,  or  in  perilous  combat  with 
ecclesiastical  abuses,  drew  the  minds  of  men  to  the 
Scriptures  and  to  a  more  spiritual  conception  of  religion, 
was,  in  a  greater  or  less  measure,  a  reformer  before  the 
Reformation." 


THE  DAWN  OF  THE  REFORMATION. 


From  the  twelfth  century  down  to  the  dawn  of  the 
Reformation,  there  were  found  here  and  there,  especially 
in  Southern  France  and  Northern  Italy,  "  anti-sacerdotal 
sects,"  who  indulged  in  vehement  invectives  against  the 
shameful  immoralities  of  the  priesthood  and  their  bane- 
ful usurpations  of  power.  Among  these  sects  in  South- 
ern France,  we  may  mention  the  noted  Albigenses,  who 
vigorously  opposed  the  authority  of  ecclesiastical  tradi- 
tion and  of  the  hierarchy,  but  who  were  finally  crushed 
out  of  existence  by  means  of  a  bloody  and  heartless 
crusade,  instigated  by  Innocent  III.,  and  which,  through 
his  agency,  was  followed  up  by  the  iniquitous  Inquisi- 
tion, which  here  had  its  origin.  "  Catharists  "  was  a 
general  name  applied  to  these  anti-sacerdotal  sects. 
Succeeding  the  Albigenses,  there  appear  in  ii/O,  the 
Waldenses,  under  the  leadership  of  Peter  Waldo,  of 
Lyons.  Because  of  their  attachment  to  the  Scriptures, 
and  of  their  fiery  opposition  to  clerical  usurpation  and 
profligacy,  they  also  became  forerunners  of  the  Refor- 
mation. Disaffection  and  unrest,  and  a  stubborn  resist- 
ance against  the  aggressions  of  the  priesthood,  were 
experienced  in  all  quarters,  especially  among  the  poor 
and  dependent  classes. 

The  Inquisition  had  done  its  bloody  work  in  the  ex- 
tirpation of  all  such  heretics  as  the  Albigenses  and  the 
Waldenses.  More  radical  and  influential  reformers  have 
now  moved  to  the  front,  such  as  Huss,  Jerome  of  Prague 

(24) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


25 


and  John  Wickliffe.  But  the  theologians  of  Paris  made 
themselves  infamous  and  almost  outstripped  their  Papal 
antagonists,  during  the  sessions  of  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance, in  their  violent  treatment  of  Huss,  and  in  the 
alacrity  with  which  they  condemned  him  and  Jerome  to 
the  stake.  One  hundred  and  fifty  years  before  the  days 
of  Luther,  Wickliffe  proved  himself  a  formidable  antag- 
onist to  the  pretensions  of  the  Papacy.  He  anticipated 
the  grand  Reformation  with  a  knowledge  of  the  religious 
situation,  with  a  perspicuity  of  genius,  and  by  apostolic 
blows  of  radical  reform,  that  shook  the  very  foundations 
of  the  Papal  edifice.  He  set  aside  Papal  decrees  by  a 
direct  appeal  to  the  Holy  Scriptures.  He  denies  tran- 
substantiation  ;  he  boldly  asserts  that  in  the  primitive 
Church  there  were  only  two  classes  of  church  officers ; 
denies  that  there  is  scriptural  authority  for  the  rites  of 
confirmation  and  extreme  unction  ;  advocates  non-inter- 
ference on  the  part  of  the  clergy  with  civil  affairs  and 
temporal  authority  ;  condemns  auricular  confession ; 
holds  that  the  exercise  of  the  power  to  bind  and  loose  is 
■of  no  effect,  unless  it  conforms  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ ; 
is  opposed  to  the  multiplied  ranks  of  the  clergy — popes, 
cardinals,  patriarchs,  monks,  canons,  et  al.;  repudiates 
the  doctrine  of  indulgences  and  supererogatory  merits, 
the  doctrine  of  the  excellence  of  poverty,  as  that  was 
held  and  as  it  lay  at  the  foundation  of  the  mendicant 
orders ;  and  he  sets  himself  agamst  artificial  church 
music,  pictures  in  worship,  consecration  with  the  use  of 
oil  and  salt,  canonization,  pilgrimages,  church  asylums 
for  criminals,  and  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy.  These 
facts  are  all  clearly  authenticated  by  reliable  historians. 
The  followers  of  Wickliffe  were  called  Lollards.  It  is  a 
remarkable  fact  that  Wickliffe  predicted  that  from  the 


26 


THE  DAWN  OF  THE  REFORMATION. 


monks  themselves  there  would  arise  men  who  would 
abandon  their  false  interpretations  of  Scriptures,  and, 
returning  to  the  apostolic  order  of  things,  would  recon- 
struct the  Church  in  the  spirit  of  Paul.  The  work  of 
reform  as  inaugurated  by  Wickliffe,  we  may  remark,  in 
passing,  presents  many  features  resembling  the  work  of 
reform  as  inaugurated  by  Thomas  and  Alexander  Camp- 
bell. The  latter  was  an  ardent  admirer  of  the  illustrious 
Wickliffe.  It  was  in  the  Council  of  Constance  that 
Huss  asserted  the  right  of  private  judgment.  This  was 
going  behind  the  Council ;  and  for  his  temerity  he  was 
commanded  to  retract  his  avowals  of  opinion,  which  he 
refused  to  do  until  he  could  be  convinced  by  argument, 
and  by  citations  from  the  Scriptures,  that  his  sentiments 
were  erroneous.  The  right  of  private  judgment  became 
one  of  the  prominent  and  distinctive  principles  of  Prot- 
estantism. Other  reformers  sprang  up,  whom  we  can 
not  mention,  such  as  the  distinguished  and  eloquent 
Savonarola,  who  lived  at  Florence,  where  he  carried  on 
his  work  of  moral  reform,  until  his  death  in  1498.  He 
exposed  the  demoralized  condition  of  the  mongrel 
Church,  and  for  laying  bare  the  rottenness  of  the  Papal 
system,  he  forfeited  his  life  under  the  flagitious  Alex- 
ander VI.,  but  predicted  a  coming  reformation. 


THE  MYSTICS. 


The  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  prd 
ceded  by  a  school  of  men  called  Mystics,  of  whom  the 
noted  Anselm  was  the  father.  The  characteristic  of  the 
Mystics  is  the  sensation  of  feeling,  rather  than  of  believ- 
ing ;  the  preference  of  intuition  to  logic;  the  quest  for 
knowledge  through  light  imparted  to  feeling,  rather 
than  by  processes  of  the  intellect ;  the  indwelling  of 
God  in  the  soul,  elevated  to  a  holy  calm  by  the  con- 
sciousness of  his  presence ;  absolute  self-renunciation 
and  the  absorption  of  the  human  will  into  the  divine  ; 
silent  meditation  and  the  ecstatic  mood.  The  character- 
istic spirit  of  this  mystical  school,  which  was  a  recoil 
from  dogmatic  theology,  and  from^the  extravagant  use 
of  outward  sacraments  and  ceremonies,  was  illustrated 
by  Thomas  a  Kempis,  in  his  celebrated  work,  entitled 
"  The  Imitation  of  Christ,"  which  it  is  said  has  probably 
had  a  larger  circulation  than  any  other  book  except  the 
Bible.  Luther  himself  was  more  or  less  influenced  by 
the  doctrines  of  the  Mystics,  especially  by  the  writings 
of  John  Tauler  and  Thomas  a  Kempis. 

The  Reformation  was  preceded  by  a  revival  of  learn- 
ing— a  new  era  of  intellectual  culture — in  which  three 
eminent  writers — Dante,  Petrarch  and  Boccaccio — made 
themselves  distinguished.  Scholasticism,  which  for  sev- 
eral hundred  years  had  been  dominant  in  the  medieval 
ages,  gradually  gave  way  as  books  began  to  multiply, 
and  as  the  Scriptures  continued  to  be  translated  into  the 

(27) 


28 


THE  MYSTICS. 


native  languages  of  the  people.  The  Schoolmen  and 
tlie  Mystics  began  to  retire  to  the  background  imme- 
diately upon  the  introduction  of  the  art  of  printing,  and 
as  distinguished  scholars,  coming  to  the  front,  began  to 
test  the  doctrinal  and  ecclesiastical  system  of  that  age 
by  a  translation  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  from  the 
original,  the  original  fountain  of  truth  having  been  sup- 
pressed by  the  Papacy,  and  the  mass  of  the  people 
deprived  of  the  key  of  knowledge.  The  gigantic  fabric 
of  Latin  Christianity,  that  vast  receptacle  of  idolatry  and 
pagan  superstition,  began  to  quake  at  the  near  approach 
of  intelligent  faith  and  reason,  and  of  civil  and  religious 
liberty.  The  Papacy  could  no  longer  endure  the  light 
of  investigation.  But  the  revival  of  literature  in  Italy 
was,  to  a  considerable  extent,  the  revival  of  paganism. 
"  Even  an  Epicurean  infidelity,"  says  Professor  Fisher 
in  his  History  of  tJie  Reformation,  "as  to  the  foundation 
of  religion,  which  was  caught  from  Lucretius  and  from 
the  dialogues  of  Cicero,  infected  a  wide  circle  of  literary 
men.  Preachers,  in  a  strain  of  florid  rhetoric,  would 
associate  the  names  of  Greek  and  Roman  heroes  v.  ith 
those  of  the  apostles  and  saints,  and  with  the  name  of 
the  Savior  himself  If  an  example  of  distinguished 
piety  was  required,  reference  would  be  made  to  Xuma 
Pompilius.  So  prevalent  was  disbelief  respecting  the 
fundamental  truths  of  natural  religion,  that  the  Council 
of  the  Lateran,  under  Leo  X.,  felt  called  upon  to  affirm 
the  immortality  and  individuality  of  the  soul."  It  ap- 
peared as  if  the  gods  of  the  old  mythology  had  risen 
from  the  dead,  if  we  may  judge  by  the  sentiments  of  the 
poets  and  rhetoricians  of  that  literary  revival,  "while  in 
the  minds  of  thinking  men  Plato  and  Plotinus  had  sup- 
planted Paul  and  Isaiah."    The  influence  of  the  classic 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMliNTS. 


school  upon  the  Church  in  Italy,  as  described  by  Gui/.ot 
{History  of  Civilization,  lect.  xi.),  is  fearful  to  contem- 
plate. As  a  specimen  of  his  delineation  of  the  crooked 
ness  of  the  times,  he  says  that  the  Church  in  Italy 
"gave  herself  up  to  all  the  pleasures  of  an  indolent, 
elegant,  licentious  civilization ;  to  a  taste  for  letters,  the 
arts,  and  social  and  physical  enjoyments." 

On  the  principle  that  like  causes  produce  like  effects, 
may  not  the  study  of  the  same  classics  revive  a  love  for 
pagan  literature  in  our  times;  and  is  it  not  now  the  ten- 
dency of  pulpit  rhetoricians,  as  they  come  from  our  col- 
leges dripping  with  the  distillations  of  pagan  philosophy, 
to  supplant  Paul  and  Isaiah  by  the  introduction  of  Plato' 
and  Plotinus  ?  And  how  often  do  we  hear  college  fledg- 
hngs,  and  some  older  ones,  who  consider  themselves 
"advanced  thinkers,"  associating  the  names  of  Greek 
and  Roman  heroes  with  those  of  the  apostles  and  saints, 
and  even  with  the  name  of  the  Savior  himself. 

The  religious  condition  of  things  in  Germany,  at  the 
outbreak  of  the  Reformation,  was  far  different  from  that 
of  Italy.  Reuchlin  and  Erasmus,  two  of  the  most  emi- 
nent scholars  of  the  age,  taking  advantage  of  the  revival 
of  literature,  made  it  contribute  to  the  purification  of  the 
morals  of  the  people,  and  to  an  earnest  and  vigorous 
investigation  of  the  Scriptures.  These  were  the  men 
who  furnished  Luther,  the  great  champion  of  the  Refor- 
mation, with  the  literary  munitions  of  war  that  crushed 
the  dominion  of  the  Papacy,  and  which  liberated  the 
masses  from  ignorance  and  foul  superstition. 


LUTHER  AND  THE  MAN  OF  SIN. 


The  people  of  this  generation  have  a  just  right  to 
know  why  we  propose,  and  strenuously  labor  for,  a 
thorough  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of  things, 
and  why,  religiously,  we  reject  all  human  authority  and 
accept  only  the  law  and  authority  of  Jesus  the  Christ. 
For  more  than  a  half  century  we  have  kept  this  grand 
proposition  before  the  eyes  of  all  men.  It  is  due  to  the 
rising  generation — doubly  due  to  our  own  children — 
that  we  should  furnish  the  most  substantial  reasons  for 
having  inaugurated  a  movement  as  radical  and  far-reach- 
ing as  that  which  was  inaugurated  by  Christ  and  his 
apostles.  We  propose  more  than  a  refotmation  of  refor- 
mations. We  go  back  of  all  reformations,  and  plant 
ourselves  upon  apostolic  ground.  It  is  a  fact  patent  to 
all  men  acquainted  with  ecclesiastical  history,  that  there 
is  not  a  Protestant  denomination  in  existence  that  has 
entirely  emerged  from  the  great  apostasy  of  1260  years' 
continuance,  and  that  has  effectively  cleared  itself  of  the 
mystic  influences  of  spiritual  Babylon.  No  denomina- 
tion, however  respectable  it  may  appear  in  the  eyes  of 
the  world,  can  claim  identity  with  the  Church  of  Christ, 
as  founded  by  his  apostles,  as  long  as  it  countenances 
human  dogmas,  substitutes  theories  for  facts,  supplants 
the  law  and  authority  of  Christ  by  laws  of  expediency, 
changes  the  ordinances  of  the  Church,  mystifies  the 
design  of  the  ordinances,  bears  titles  which  the  Spirit 

(30) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


31 


never  authorized,  and  carnalizes  the  worship  of  the  true 
and  living  God. 

It  is  our  purpose,  in  these  essays,  to  show  the  origin 
and  drift  of  the  several  reformations  from  the  days  of 
Luther  down  to  the  present  time,  and  to  show  also,  in 
tracing  out  these  events,  that  not  one  of  the  so-called 
reformatory  movements  ever  resulted  in  the  full  restora- 
tion of  Apostolic  Christianity.  We  write  for  those  who 
neither  read  nor  investigate,  but  who  ought  to  read  and 
investigate.  Many  of  our  own  people,  which  statement 
includes  many  of  our  own  preachers,  are  not  posted  on 
these  questions  as  they  ought  to  be,  while  professing  at 
the  same  time  to  stand  upon  the  only  true  and  tenable 
ground. 

Luther  was  a  great  power  in  crushing  the  Man  of  Sin, 
but  he  did  not  succeed  in  grinding  him  to  powder. 
Luther  was  first  aroused  by  the  visible  presence  of  a 
•corrupt  priesthood.  The  origin  of  the  Reformation  of 
the  sixteenth  century  was  quite  humble  and  somewhat 
indefinite.  Pope  Leo  X.  had  arranged  for  a  very  exten- 
sive sale  of  indulgences.  He  gave  out  as  a  pretext  for 
the  outrage  that  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  were  intended 
for  a  war  against  the  Turks  and  the  erection  of  St. 
Peter's  Church.  It  was  quite  generally  believed  that 
the  real  destination  of  the  money  was  to  defray  the 
exorbitant  expenditures  of  the  Pope's  Court  and  to  serve 
as  a  marriage  dowry  to  his  sister.  Archbishop  Albert, 
of  Mentz,  a  man  whose  character  was  no  better  than 
that  of  Leo  X. ,  authorized  the  sale  in  Germany  on  con- 
dition that  fifty  per  cent,  should  flow  into  his  own 
pocket.  Tetzel,  a  Dominican  friar,  carried  on  the  trade 
with  such  a  dash  of  effrontery  as  to  outrage  the  sen- 
timents of  thousands  of  honest  and  sincere  people. 


32 


LUTHER  AND  THE  MAN  OF  SIN. 


Luther,  then  a  young  monk  in  an  Augustinian  convent, 
was  among  the  first  to  rise  against  this  profanation  of 
pure  reHgion,  and  to  conscientiously  protest  against  the 
abomination.  When  a  young  student,  he  had  been 
driven  by  his  anxiety  for  the  salvation  of  his  soul  into 
the  seclusion  of  a  convent.  After  long  doubts  and 
many  mental  troubles,  he  had  derived  from  a  profound 
study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  of  the  writings  of  Augus- 
tine and  Tauler,  the  consolatory  belief  that  man  is  to  be 
saved,  not  by  his  own  works  of  righteousness,  but  by 
faith  in  God  through  Jesus  Christ.  As  an  earnest  Chris- 
tian man,  who  had  taken  upon  himself  a  solemn  obliga- 
tion to  teach  a  pure  religion,  and  who,  as  we  have  reason 
to  believe,  sincerely  believed  in  the  Christianity  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  he  felt  himself  impelled  to  enter  an 
energetic  protest  against  the  daring  deeds  of  Tetzel.  In 
accordance  with  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
he  addressed  himself  to  several  neighboring  bishops, 
urging  them  to  stop  the  sale  of  indulgences;  but,  not 
heeding  his  appeal,  he  resolved  to  act  upon  his  own 
account. 

It  was  on  the  eve  of  All-Saints'  Diy,  October  31,  15 17, 
that  he  affixed  to  the  Castle  Church  of  Wittenberg  the 
celebrated  ninety-five  theses,  which  bold  act  has  gener- 
ally been  regarded  as  the  beginning  of  the  Lutheran 
Reformation.  But  both  Papal  and  Protestant  writers 
are  agreed  that  these  theses  involved  by  no  means,  on 
Luther's  part,  a  conscious  renunciation  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  doctrine.  Luther  himself  made  this  manifestly 
clear  by  his  subsequent  appeal  to  the  Pope,  and  also  by 
the  fact  that  he  was  attempting  the  nformation  and  not 
the  disorganization  of  the  Church.  His  opposition  to- 
the  corruptions  of  Rome  was  but  a  reflex  of  public  opin- 


K  E FO K  M  ATO R  Y  M O V  E M  E N  r S . 


33 


ion,  which,  by  this  time,  had  become  wide-spread.  The 
Pope  became  alarmed,  and  was  startled,  as  by  an  elec- 
tric shock,  when  he  discovered  finally  that  the  humble 
and  obscure  monk,  whom  he  at  first  feigned  to  despise, 
had  sent  an  irresistible  impulse  all  over  the  religious 
world.  Immediate  steps  were  taken  to  arrest,  if  possi- 
ble, the  progress  of  Luther's  revolutionary  movement. 
At  first  the  Pope  summoned  Luther  to  Rome  ;  but  at 
the  request  of  the  University  of  Wittenberg,  and  the 
IClector  of  Saxony,  the  concession  was  made  that  the 
Papal  legate,  Thomas  de  Vio  (better  known  in  history 
as  Cajetanus),  should  examine  Luther  in  a  paternal  and 
conciliatory  manner.  Luther's  characteristic  line  of 
defense  was  the  rejection  of  the  arguments  as  taken  from 
the  Fathers  and  the  scholastics,  and  the  demand  to  be 
refuted  by  arguments  cited  from  the  Bible.  After  hear- 
ing that  the  Pope  had  issued  a  fresh  Papal  bull  in  behalf 
of  indulgences,  Luther  changed  his  appeal  to  an  ecu- 
menical council.  Soon  after  this  the  Court  of  Rome 
found  it  expedient  to  change  its  policy  with  Luther,  and 
to  win  him  back  by  compromise  and  kindliness.  The 
Papal  chamberlain,  Karl  Von  Miltitz,  a  native  of  Sax- 
ony, was  so  far  successful  that  Luther  promised  to  write 
letters  in  which  he  would  admonish  all  persons  to  be 
obedient  and  respectful  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  to 
write  to  the  Pope  to  assure  him  that  he  had  never 
thought  of  infringing  upon  the  rights  and  privileges  of 
the  Mother  Church.  History  informs  us  that  the  letter 
was  actually  indited  ;  its  language  is  replete  with  expres- 
sions of  condescension,  and  it  exalts  the  Roman  Church 
above  everything  but  Christ  himself  He  also  promised 
to  discontinue  the  controversy  if  his  opponents  wo;;!d 
agree  to  do  the  same.    But  only  a  brief  period  elapsed 

4 


34 


LUTHER  AND  THE  MAN  OF  SIN. 


before  he  was  drawn  into  the  Disputation  of  Leipslc 
(continuing  from  June  27  to  July  15,  15  19),  which  the 
vain  glorified  Dr.  Eck  had  originally  arranged  with  Carl- 
stadt.  History  awards  to  Dr.  Eck  the  glory  of  having 
proved  himself  the  more  able  disputant,  but  Luther's 
cause  was  nevertheless  greatly  benefited  by  the  discus- 
sion. The  arguments  of  his  fiery  opponents  drove 
Luther  onward  to  a  more  decided  rejection  of  Romish 
innovations.  He  was  led  by  degrees  to  assert  boldly 
that  the  Pope  was  not  by  divine  right  the  universal 
Bishop  of  the  Church,  to  entertain  doubts  of  the  infalli- 
bility of  councils,  and  to  believe  that  not  all  the  Hussite 
doctrines  were  heretical. 

Great  men  soon  came  to  the  support  of  Luther,  and 
among  others.  Dr.  Melancthon,  one  of  the  greatest 
scholars  of  the  age.  The  conflict  between  Rome  and 
Luther  now  became  one  of  life  and  death.  Dr.  Eck 
returned  from  a  journey  to  Rome,  with  a  Papal  bull 
which  declared  Luther  a  heretic,  and  which  ordered  the 
burning  of  his  writings.  Luther,  on  the  other  hand, 
systematized  his  views  in  three  works,  all  of  which 
appeared  in  1 5  20,  viz. :  To  His  Imperial  Majesty  and  the 
Christian  Nobility  of  the  German  Nation — On  the  Baby- 
lonian Captivity  of  tlie  Church — -Sermon  on  the  Freedom  of 
a  Christian  Man.  The  culmination  finally  came,  when 
(December  10,  1520)  Luther  publicly  burnt  the  Papal 
bull  with  the  Papal  canon  law.  The  Pope  succeeded  in 
prevailing  upon  the  German  emperor  and  the  German 
Diet  of  Worms  (1521)  to  proceed  against  the  great 
heretic ;  and  when  Luther  firmly  refused  to  recant,  and 
persistently  avowed  that  he  could  yield  to  nothing  but 
the  Holy  Scriptures  and  sound  argument,  he  was  placed 
under  the  ban  of  the  Empire;  but  so  great  was  the  dis- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


35 


content  in  Germany  with  corrupt  Rome,  that  the  same 
assembly  which  condemned  Luther  for  opposing  the 
faith  of  their  ancestors,  presented  one  hundred  and  one 
articles  of  complaint  against  the  Roman  See.  As  the 
ban  of  the  Empire  against  Luther  imperiled  his  life,  he 
was  persuaded  by  his  friends  to  seclude  himself  in  the 
Castle  of  Wartburg.  Placed  beyond  the  turmoil  of 
political  agitation,  he  found  time  to  issue  several  power- 
ful polemical  essays  against  auricular  confession,  against 
monastic  vows,  against  masses  for  the  dead,  and  against 
the  new  idol  of  the  Archbishop  of  Mentz.  After  his 
return  from  Wartburg,  Luther  gave  his  chief  attention 
to  the  continuation  of  his  translation  of  the  Bible  in  Ger- 
man, which  was  completed  in  1534,  and  which  was  a 
master  production  for  that  age  of  the  world,  while 
Melancthon,  in  his  celebrated  work  on  theological  sci- 
ence, gave  to  the  theological  leaders  of  the  new  order  of 
things  a  hand-book  of  doctrine.  Then  came  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  by  which  every  man  was  to  be  measured ; 
and,  having  adopted  this  as  the  theological  measure  of 
every  man,  then  the  Bible  became  once  more  a  sealed 
book,  then  a  cessation  of  Bible  investigation,  and  finally 
the  imposition  of  human  dogmas  and  ecclesiastical  con- 
traction, in  which  condition  of  stagnation  the  Lutheran 
Reformation  has  stood  ever  since,  but  with  an  expansion 
of  many  millions  of  nominal  members,  all  of  whom  were 
made  members  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  infancy,  with- 
out faith  and  knowledge,  and  without  liberty  of  choice. 
At  the  Diet  of  Worms,  1521,  before  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession was  formulated  into  a  creed,  when  Luther  was 
peremptorily  called  upon  to  recant,  he  replied  in  Latin : 
"Unless  I  shall  be  convinced  by  the  testimonies  of  the 
.Scriptures  or  by  evident  reason  (for  I  believe  neither 


36 


LtlHEK  AND  THE  MAN  OF  SIN. 


Pope  nor  councils  alone,  since  it  is  manifest  they  have 
often  erred  and  contradicted  themselves),  I  am  bound 
by  the  Scriptures  I  have  quoted,  and  my  conscience  is 
held  captive  by  the  Word  of  God ;  and  as  it  is  neither 
safe  nor  right  to  act  against  conscience,  I  can  not  and 
will  not  retract  anything. "  He  added  in  German  :  '•"Here 
I  stand;  I  can  not  otherwise :  God  help  me.  Amen." 

Memorable  words,  if  only  he  had  adhered  to  them. 
But  subsequently  he  took  an  active  part  in  forming  the 
constitution  of  the  Consistories.  He  was,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  other  ecclesiastics,  the  author  of  the  Marburg 
Articles  and  Schwabach  Articles  (1529),  which  furnished 
the  basis,  and  to  a  large  extent  the  material,  both  doc- 
trinal and  verbal,  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in  1530, 
during  its  direct  preparation  and  presentation.  During 
his  conflicts  with  the  powers  of  Rome,  he  exhorted  his 
friends  not  to  call  themselves  Lutherans,  but  Christians, 
and  he  also  told  them  that  he  was  not  writing  his  tracts 
to  bring  them  to  him,  but  to  bring  them  to  the  Bible. 
In  dissolving  Church  and  State,  and  in  procuring  the 
civil  liberties  of  the  German  people,  as  well  as  the  liber- 
ties of  the  people  of  other  States,  the  Lutheran  Refor- 
mation accomplished  great  and  lasting  good ;  but, 
religiously,  as  soon  as  the  Augsburg  Confession  was 
made  to  occupy  the  place  of  the  Bible,  reformation 
ceased,  and  there  has  been  but  little  progress  in  that 
direction  since.  Luther  never  attempted  the  complete 
restoration  of  Apostolic  Christianity.  He  never  com- 
prehended such  a  question,  which  is  made  the  more 
evident  by  the  fact  that  the  Augsburg  Confession  con- 
tains doctrines  and  dogmas  which  are  purely  of  Papal 
origin,  notably  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation,  on 
account  of  which,  as  well  as  on  account  of  other  Romisb 


REFORMATORV  MOVEMENTS. 


37 


dogmas,  Zwingli  and  other  reformers,  in  Switzerland, 
separated  from  him,  as  we  shall  show  in  our  next  article. 
Though  the  great  reformer  freed  himself  from  the  fetters 
of  Papal  ecclesiasticism,  and  severed  his  connection  with 
the  despotism  of  Rome,  it  is  nevertheless  a  fact  that  he 
never  divested  himself  entirely  of  the  mysticism  of  the 
Dark  Ages,  and  never  thoroughly  rid  himself  of  the 
traditions  of  Rome.  Hence  the  necessity  of  succeeding 
reformatory  movements,  not  one  of  which  effected  a 
restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of  things,  either  in 
doctrine  or  in  practice,  as  we  shall  discover  in  our 
future  investigations.  We  accept  the  good  that  preced 
ing  reformers  have  accomplished,  and  honor  those  who 
have  rescued  the  Bible  from  the  grasp  of  a  despotic 
hierarchy,  but  whatever  they  taught  contrary  to  God's 
word,  we  reject  What  the  early  reformers  left  undone, 
we  propose  to  complete  ;  by  which  we  mean  an  entire 
restoration  of  the  ancient  order  of  things,  in  faith  and 
practice,  in  doctrine  and  discipline. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 


Having  in  a  previous  chapter  given  the  origin  and  a 
brief  outline  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation,  we  next  pro- 
ceed to  present  a  history  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
which  we  derive  from  the  most  rehable  standard  author- 
ities. 

After  Charles  V.  had  concluded  a  peace  with  France, 
he  summoned  a  German  Diet  to  meet  at  Augsburg, 
April  8,  1530.  The  decree  of  invitation  called  for  aid 
against  the  Turks,  who,  in  1529,  had  besieged  Vienna; 
it  also  promised  a  discussion  of  the  religious  questions 
of  the  time,  and  such  a  settlement  of  them  as  both  to 
abolish  existing  abuses  and  to  satisfy  the  demands  of 
the  Pope.  Elector  John,  of  Saxony,  who  received  this 
decree  March  11,  directed  (March  14)  Luther,  Jonas, 
Bugenhagen  and  Melancthon  to  meet  in  Torgaii,  and 
draw  up  a  summary  of  the  most  important  and  necessary 
articles  of  faith,  in  support  of  which  the  evangelical 
princes  and  states  should  combine.  These  theologians, 
as  we  shall  term  them,  drew  up  a  profession  of  theit 
faith,  the  groundwork  of  which  they  found  in  the  seven^ 
teen  articles  which  had  been  prepared  by  Luther  fof 
the  convention  at  Schwabach,  and  fifteen  other  articles, 
which  had  been  drawn  up  at  the  theological  conference 
at  Marburg,  and  subsequently  presented  to  the  Saxon 
Elector  John  at  Torgau.  The  first  draft  made  by  the 
four  theologians,  in  seventeen  articles,  was  at  once 
published,  and  elicited  a  joint  reply  from  Wimpina, 

(38) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


39 


Mensing,  Redcerfer  and  Dr.  Elgers,  which  Luther 
immediately  answered.  The  subject  of  the  controversy 
had  thus  become  generally  known.  Luther,  Jonas  and 
Melancthon  were  invited  by  the  Saxon  Elector  to 
accompany  him  to  Augsburg.  However,  subsequently 
it  was  deemed  best  for  Luther's  safety  to  leave  him 
behind.  Melancthon,  soon  after  his  arrival  at  Augsburg, 
completed  the  Confession,  and  gave  to  it  the  title 
Apologia.  On  the  nth  of  May  he  sent  it  to  Luther, 
who  was  then  at  Coburg,  and  on  the  15th  of  May  he 
received  from  Luther  an  answer  of  approval.  Several 
alterations  were  suggested  to  Melancthon  in  his  confer- 
ence with  Jonas,  the  Saxon  Chancellor  Briick,  the 
conciliatory  Bishop  Stadion  of  Augsburg,  and  the  Impe- 
rial Secretary  Valdes.  To  the  latter,  upon  his  request, 
seventeen  articles  were  handed  by  Melancthon,  with  the 
consent  of  the  Saxon  Elector,  and  he  was  to  have  a 
preliminary  discussion  concerning  them  with  the  Papal 
legate  Pimpinelli.  Upon  the  opening  of  the  Diet,  June 
20,  the  so-called  evangelical  theologians  who  were  pres- 
ent— Melancthon,  Jonas,  Agricola,  Brenz,  Schnepf  and 
others — presented  the  Confession  to  the  Elector.  The 
latter,  on  June  23,  had  it  signed  by  the  evangelical 
princes  and  representatives  of  cities  who  were  present, 
viz. :  John,  Elector  of  Saxony ;  George,  Margrave  of 
Brandenburg;  Ernest,  Duke  of  Lunenburg;  Philip, 
Landgrave  of  Hesse;  John  Frederick,  Duke  of  Saxe; 
Francis,  Duke  of  Lunenburg ;  Wolfgang,  Prince  of 
Anhalt,  and  the  magistrates  of  Nuremberg  and  Reut- 
linger. 

The  Emperor  had  ordered  the  Confession  to  be  pre- 
sented to  him  at  the  next  session,  June  24 ;  but  when 
the  evangelical  princes  asked  for  permission  to  read  it, 


40 


ORIGIN  OK  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 


their  petition  was  refused,  and  efforts  were  made  to  pre- 
vent the  public  reading  of  the  document  altogether. 
The  evangehcal  princes  declared,  however,  that  they 
would  not  part  with  the  Confession  until  its  reading 
should  be  allowed.  The  25th  of  the  month  was  then 
fixed  as  the  day  of  its  presentation.  In  order  to  exclude 
the  people,  the  little  chapel  of  the  Episcopal  Palace  was 
appointed  in  the  place  of  the  spacious  City  Hall,  where 
the  meetings  of  the  Diet  were  held.  In  this  chapel  the 
Protestant  princes  assembled  on  the  appointed  day, 
June  25,  1530.  The  Saxon  Chancellor,  Briick,  held  in 
his  hands  the  Latin,  Dr.  Christian  Bayer  the  German 
copy.  They  stepped  into  the  middle  of  the  august 
assembly,  and  all  the  Protestant  princes  rose  from  their 
seats,  but  were  instantly  commanded  to  sit  down.  The 
Emperor  wished  to  hear  the  Latin  copy  read  first,  but 
the  Elector  replied  that  they  were  on  German  ground  ; 
whereupon  the  Emperor  consented  to  the  reading  of  the 
German  copy,  which  was  done  by  Dr.  Bayer.  The 
reading  lasted  from  four  to  six  o'clock.  The  reading 
being  completed,  the  Emperor  ordered  both  copies  to 
be  given  to  him.  The  German  copy  he  handed  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Mayence,  the  Latin  he  carried  with  him 
to  Brussels.  Neither  of  these  copies  is  now  extant. 
The  Emperor  promised  to  take  this  "highly  important 
matter"  into  serious  consideration,  and  make  known 
his  decision ;  in  the  meanwhile  the  Confession  was  not 
to  be  printed  without  imperial  permission.  The  Prot- 
estant princes  promised  to  comply  with  this  wish  ;  but 
when,  soon  after  the  reading,  an  erroneous  edition  of 
the  Confession  appeared,  it  became  necessary  to  have 
both  the  German  and  the  Latin  texts  published,  which 
work  was  done  through  Melancthon.    On  June  27  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


41 


■Confession  was  given,  in  the  presence  of  the  whole 
assembly,  to  the  Roman  Catholic  theologians  to  be 
refuted.  The  most  prominent  among  them  were  Eck, 
Faber,  Wimpina,  CochliEus  and  Dietenberger.  Before 
they  got  through  with  their  work  a  letter  was  received 
from  Erasmus,  who  had  been  asked  for  his  opinion  by 
Cardinal  Campegius,  recommending  caution,  and  the 
concession  of  the  Protestant  demands  concerning  the 
marriage  of  the  priests,  monastic  vows  and  the  Lord's 
Supper. 

On  July  12  the  Roman  Catholic  "Confutation"  was 
presented,  which  so  displeased  the  Emperor  that  "of 
two  hundred  and  eighty  leaves,  only  twelve  remained 
whole. "  A  new  ' '  Confutation  "  was  therefore  prepared 
and  read  to  the  Diet,  August  3,  by  the  Imperial  Secre- 
tary Schweiss.  No  copy  of  it  was  given  to  the  "evan- 
gelical members"  of  the  Diet,  and  it  was  not  published 
until  1573,  by  Fabricius.  Immediately  after  the  reading 
of  the  Confutation,  the  Protestants  were  commanded  to 
conform  to  it.  Negotiations  for  effecting  a  compromise 
were  begun  by  both  parties,  but  led  to  no  practical 
result.  Negotiations  between  the  Lutherans  and  the 
Zwinglians  were  equally  fruitless.  Zwinglius — angli- 
cized Zwingle — had  sent  to  the  Emperor  a  memorial, 
dated  July  4,  and  Bucer,  Capito  and  Hedio  had  drawn 
up,  in  the  name  of  the  cities  of  Strasburg,  Constance, 
Memmingen  and  Lindau,  the  Covfessio  Teirapolitana, 
which  was  presented  to  the  Emperor  July  11.  Neither 
of  these  two  Confessions  was  read,  and  both  vere 
rejected. 

Melancthon,  at  the  request  of  the  "evangelical 
princes  "  and  cities,  prepared  an  "  Apology  of  the  Con- 
fession "  in  opposition  to  the  Roman  Catholic  "  Confu- 


42 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 


tation,"  which  was  presented  by  the  Chancellor  Briick, 
September  22,  to  the  Emperor,  who  refused  to  receive 
it.  Subsequently  Melancthon  received  a  copy  of  the 
"Confutation,"  which  led  to  many  alterations  in  the 
first  draft  of  the  Apology.  It  was  then  published  in 
Latin,  and  in  a  German  translation  by  Jonas  (Witten- 
berg, 1 531).  A  controversy  subsequently  arose,  in 
consequence  of  which  Melancthon,  after  1540,  made 
considerable  alterations  in  the  original  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, altering,  especially  in  Article  X.,  the  statement 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  favor  of  the 
view  of  the  Reformers.  Melancthon,  who  had  already 
been  charged  with  "  crypto-Calvinism  "  (concealed  Cal- 
vinism), was  severely  attacked  on  account  of  these 
alterations;  yet  the  "Confessio  Variata"  remained  in 
the  ascendency  until  1580,  when  the  Confessio  Invariata 
was  put  into  the  '■'•Concordienbuch  "  in  its  place,  and  thus 
the  unaltered  Confession  has  come  to  be  generally 
regarded  as  the  standard  of  the  Lutheran  churches.  It 
is  but  just  to  say,  however,  that  the  altered  Confession 
has  not  ceased  to  find  advocates,  and  several  branches 
of  the  Lutheran  Church  have  even  abrogated  the  author- 
itative character  of  the  Confession,  and  do  not  demand 
from  their  clergy  a  belief  in  all  its  doctrines. 

And  this  is  how  the  Augsburg  Confession  struggled 
into  existence.  The  following  table  of  the  contents  of 
the  Confession  and  of  the  Apology  will  give  the  reader 
an  idea  of  a  religious  system  of  things  that,  at  this  time, 
probably  wields  an  influence,  directly  and  indirectljs 
over  forty  million  people  : 

Part  I  (1)  acknowledges  four  ecumenical  councils  ;  (2)  declares 
original  sin  to  consist  wholly  in  concupiscence;  (3)  contains  the  aub- 
stancc  of  the  Apostles'  Creed;  (4)  declares  that  justification  is  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


43 


effect  of  faith,  exclusive  of  good  works  ;  (5)  declares  the  word  of  God 
and  the  sacraments  to  be  the  means  of  conveying  the  Holy  Spirit,  but 
never  without  faitli ;  (6)  that  faith  must  produce  good  works  purely  in 
obedience  to  God,  and  not  in  order  to  the  meriting  justification;  (7) 
the  -.rue  Church  consists  of  the  godly  only  ;  (8)  allows  the  validity  of 
the  Fax  rainents,  though  administered  by  the  evil  one  ;  (9)  declares  the 
necessity  of  infant  baptism  ;  (10)  declares  the  real  presence  in  the 
Eucharist  continued  with  the  elements  only  during  the  period  of 
receiving;  (11)  declares  absolution  to  be  necessary,  but  not  so  particu- 
lar confession  ;  (12)  declares  against  the  Anabaptists;  (13)  requires 
acttial  faith  in  all  who  receive  the  sacraments  ;  (14)  forbids  to  teach  in 
the  Church,  or  to  administer  the  sacraments,  without  being  lawfully 
tailed  ;  (15)  orders  the  observance  of  the  holy  days  and  ceremonies  of 
the  Church  ;  (16)  of  civil  matters  and  marriage  ;  (17)  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, last  judgment,  heaven  and  hell  ;  (18)  of  free  will ;  (19)  that  God 
is  not  the  author  of  sin ;  (20)  that  good  works  are  not  altogether 
■nprofitable  ;  (21)  forbids  the  invocation  of  saints. 

Pabt  II  (1)  enjoins  communion  in  both  kinds,  and  forbids  the  pro- 
cession of  the  holy  sacrament ;  (2)  condemns  the  law  of  celibacy  of 
priests;  (3)  condemns  private  masses,  and  enjoins  that  some  of  the 
congregation  shall  communicate  with  the  priest ;  (4)  against  the  neces- 
sity of  auricular  confession  ;  (5)  against  tradition  and  human  ceremo- 
nies ;  (6)  condemns  monastic  vows;  (7)  discriminates  between  civil  and 
religious  power,  and  declares  the  power  of  the  Church  to  consist  only 
in  preaching  and  administering  the  sacraments. 

These  are  briefly  the  facts  which  show  the  origin, 
gestation  and  birth  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  The 
inteUigent  Bible  reader  can  easily  tell  how  much  of  this 
theological  medley  is  Papal,  how  much  Protestant,  how 
much  tradition,  how  much  human  speculation,  and  how 
much  apostolic  teaching.  To  say  nothing  of  the  sinful^ 
ness  of  making  the  creed,  many  of  its  doctrines  are  pos- 
itive contradictions  of  the  word  of  God,  and  wholly 
subversive  of  Bible  teaching.  The  reader  will  have 
noticed,  in  the  history  of  the  Confession  just  given, 
that  civil  rulers  had  about  as  much  to  do  in  producing 
the  creed  as  the  Reformers  themselves.    The  formation 


.44 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  ALGSUUKG  CONFESSION. 


of  this  Augsburg  Confession  cut  off  a'l  further  investi- 
gation of  the  Scriptures,  and  forever  stereotyped  the 
faith  of  its  adherents.  By  the  doctrines  of  this  Confes- 
sion it  will  be  seen  that  Luther  remained  partly  a 
Roman  Catholic  as  long  as  he  lived,  and  it  was  because 
of  this  fact  that  Zwingle,  as  we  shall  see  further  on, 
with  other  reformers  in  Switzerland,  separated  from 
Luther,  and  framed  another  Confession  in  harmony 
with  their  belief  Creedism,  as  the  reader  will  have 
perceived,  began  at  the  very  point  where  reformation 
ceased.  And  hence  as  long  as  creeds  exist,  and  as  long 
as  men  prefer  creeds  in  lieu  of  the  word  of  God,  there 
can  be  no  Christian  union  upon  the  basis  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, so  far  as  creed-lovers  are  concerned. 


REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND. 


Ulrich  Zwingle  was  the  founder  of  Protestantism  in 
Switzerland.  He  was  a  man  of  fine  education  and  of 
extensive  learning.  He  was  educated  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  He  possessed  a  bright  intellect,  was 
a  great  lover  of  literature,  was  early  in  life  distinguished 
for  his  love  of  truth,  and  devoted  himself  intensely  to 
an  investigation  of  the  Scriptures.  Like  Luther,  wit- 
nessing the  corruptions  of  the  clergy,  and  discovering 
dogmas  and  traditions  not  found  in  the  Word  of  God, 
such  as  the  worship  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  hideous 
doctrine  of  indulgences,  he  attempted  a  work  of  reform 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Church.  He  was  soon  charged 
with  preaching  heresy,  which  the  Papal  powers  regarded 
as  subversive  of  the  established  order  of  things.  In  a 
conference  held  at  Zurich,  called  at  his  own  request, 
January  29,  1523,  in  the  presence  of  an  assembly  of 
more  than  six  hundred  men,  he  defended  sixty-seven 
propositions,  which  were  leveled  against  the  system  of 
Romanism.  In  his  defense  against  the  charge  of  heresy, 
he  substituted  the  authority  of  the  gospel  for  the  author- 
ity of  the  Church  ;  he  declared  the  Church  to  be  the 
communion  of  the  faithful,  who  have  no  head  but 
Christ ;  he  maintained  that  salvation  is  through  faith  in 
Christ  as  the  only  priest  and  intercessor  ;  he  rejected  the 
Papacy  and  the  mass,  the  invocation  of  saints,  justifica- 
tion by  works,  fasts,  festivals,  pilgrimages,  monastic 
orders  and  the  priesthood,  auricular  confession,  absolu 

(45) 


46 


REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND. 


tion,  indulgences,  penances,  purgatory,  and  indeed  all 
the  characteristic  peculiarities  of  the  Romish  Church. 
In  another  disputation,  before  a  much  larger  assembly, 
on  the  26th  of  October  following,  he  obtained  a  decree 
of  the  Council  against  the  use  of  images  and  the  sacrifice 
of  the  mass. 

By  these  statements  it  will  be  seen  that  Zwingle,  as  a 
clear  headed  reformer,  and  as  one  capable  of  making 
dean-C'jt  distinctions  between  the  teaching  of  the  Bible 
And  the  traditions  of  Rome,  was  in  advance  of  Luther. 
In  1525  he  published  his  chief  work,  entitled  a  "Com- 
mentary on  True  and  False  Religion,"  and  also  a  treat- 
ise on  original  sin.  The  tenets  he  published  are 
substantially  the  same  as  those  adopted  by  the  Protes- 
tant churches  generally.  In  his  philosophy  he  was  a 
predestinarian  of  an  extreme  type,  transcending  both 
Augustine  and  Calvin.  He  did  not  confine  the  illumi- 
nation of  the  Spirit  within  the  circle  of  revealed  religion, 
nor  do  his  adherents  of  the  present  age,  or  to  those  who 
receive  the  word  of  God  and  the  '  sacraments."  He 
held  that  the  virtues  of  heathen  sages  and  heroes  are 
due  to  the  presence  of  divine  grace,  and  asserted,  for 
example,  that  Socrates  was  more  pious  and  holy  than 
all  Dominicans  and  Franciscans.  "He  had  busied 
himself,"  says  Neander,  ''with  the  study  of  antiquity, 
for  which  he  had  a  predilection,  and  had  not  the  right 
criterion  for  distinguishing  the  ethical  standing-point  of 
Christianity  from  that  of  the  ancients  "  From  Zurich 
the  Reformation  spread,  and  in  a  short  time  Zwingle 
found  in  CEcolampadius  as  great  a  counselor  and  leader 
as  Luther  had  found  in  the  distinguished  and  scholarly 
Melancthon.  The  authority  of  the  Papal  system  never 
had  the  same  deep-set  hold  upon  Zwingle  as  it  had  upon 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


47 


Luther ;  a  question,  however,  which  is  not  necessary  to 
discuss  here,  as  we  are  only  aiming  to  present  a  histori- 
ciA  connection  of  things  and  events.  When  Luther  was 
put  under  the  ban  of  the  Church,  Zwingle,  as  we  learn 
from  Ranke,  the  German  historian,  was  still  the  recipi- 
ent of  a  pension  from  the  Pope.  When  Luther  at  the 
Diet  of  Worms,  in  the  face  of  Papal  princes  and  the 
legates  of  Rome,  refused  to  submit  to  the  authority  of 
the  Pope,  Zwingle  had  not  yet  been  seriously  molested. 
As  late  as  1523  he  received  a  co-rphmentary  letter  from 
Pope  Adrian  VI.  —  facts  which  go  to  show  that  the 
reformations  effected  in  the  sixteenth  century  were  only 
partial,  and  of  course  incomplete,  and  a  fact  which  we 
desire  our  contemporaries  to  understand,  in  view  of  the 
work  in  which  we  are  engaged. 

Finally  there  broke  out  the  great  controversy  on  the 
dogma  of  transubstantiation  between  the  Lutheran  and 
Swiss  reformers.  Luther  did  not  obtain  this  dogma 
from  the  apostolic  record,  but  from  theologians  of  the 
Latin  Church — from  Radbert,  of  the  ninth  century,  from 
the  leading  schoolmen  of  the  thirteenth  century,  which 
was  made  an  article  of  faith  by  the  fourth  Lateran  Coun- 
cil, in  121 5,  under  Innocent  III.  The  Reformers,  as  a 
class,  with  one  consent,  denied  this  dogma,  "together 
with  the  associated  doctrine  of  the  sacrificial  character 
of  the  Eucharist."  But  Luther  stoutly  affirmed  the 
actual  corporate  presence  of  the  glorified  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  in  connection  with  the  bread  and  wine, 
so  that  the  body  and  blood,  in  some  mysterious  way, 
are  received  by  the  communicant,  whether  he  be  a 
believer  or  an  unbeliever.  Luther  did  not  hold  that  the 
heavenly  body  of  Christ,  which  is  offered  and  received 
in  the  "sacrament,"  occupies  space  ;  yet  it  is  received 


48 


REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND. 


by  all  who  partake  of  the  bread  and  wine — not  a  portion 
of  the  body,  but  the  entire  Christ  by  each  communicant. 
It  is  received,  in  some  proper  sense,  with  the  mouth. 
We  have  quoted  from  De  Wette,  with  the  German 
before  us.  Zwingle  denied  that  the  body  of  Christ  is 
present,  in  any  sense,  in  the  "sacrament,"  but,  with  his 
followers,  he  was  more  and  more  disposed  to  attach 
importance  to  a  spiritual  presence  in  tb.e  institution. 
This  belief  Calvin  emphasized,  and  added  the  positive 
assertion  of  a  direct  influence  upon  the  believing  com- 
municant, which  flows  from  Christ  through  the  medium 
or  instrumentality  of  his  human  nature.  "  The  Word 
and  the  Sacraments  Luther  had  made  the  criteria  of  the 
Church.  On  upholding  them  in  their  just  place,  every- 
thing that  distinguished  his  reform  frcjm  enthusiasm  or 
rationalism  depended.  He  had  never  thought  of  for- 
saking the  dogmatic  system  of  Latin  Christianity  in  its 
earlier  and  purer  days,  and  he  looked  with  alarm  on 
what  struck  him  as  a  rationalistic  innovation  "  At  the 
Conference  of  Marburg,  in  1529.  which  was  called  with 
a  view  of  reconciling  the  disaffected  parties,  when  the 
theologians  sat  by  a  table,  the  Saxons  on  one  side  and 
Swiss  on  the  opposite  side,  Luther  wrote  upon  the  table 
with  chalk  his  text:  "-Hoc  est  mcum  corpus"  (this  is  my 
body),  and  resolutely  refused  to  budge  an  iota  from  the 
literal  sense. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  HEIDELBERG  CONFESSION. 


As  a  result  of  the  controversy  between  the  Lutheran 
reformers  and  the  Swiss  reformers,  w  e  have  the  Heidel- 
berg Catechism,  the  property  of  the  Reformed  Church. 
Its  name  is  derived  from  the  city  in  which  it  was  com- 
piled and  first  printed.  It  is  also  sometimes  styled  the 
Palatinate  Catechism,  from  the  territory  (the  Palatinate) 
of  the  Prince  (Frederick  III.)  under  whose  auspices  it 
was  prepared.  Soon  after  the  introduction  of  Protes- 
tantism into  the  Palatinate,  in  1546,  the  controversy 
between  Lutherans  and  Calvinists  broke  out,  and  for 
years,  especially  under  the  Elector  Otto  Heinrich  (1556- 
59),  it  raged  with  great  violence  in  Heidelberg.  Fred- 
erick III.,  who  came  into  power  in  1559,  adopted  the 
Calvinistic  view  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  favored  that 
side  of  the  question  with  all  his  princely  power.  He 
reorganized  the  Sapienz  College  (founded  by  his  prede- 
cessor) as  a  theological  school,  and  placed  at  its  head 
(1562)  Zacharias  Ursinus,  a  pupil  and  friend  of  Melanc- 
thon,  who  had  adopted  the  Reformed  opinions.  In 
order  to  put  an  end  to  religious  disputes  in  his  domin- 
ions, he  determined  to  put  forth  a  Catechism,  a  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  and  laid  the  responsibility  of  preparing 
it  upon  Ursinus  and  Caspar  Olevianus,  for  a  time  profes- 
sor in  the  University  of  Heidelberg,  then  court-preacher 
to  Frederick  III.  They  made  use  of  the  catechetical 
literature  then  in  existence,  especially  of  the  catechisms 
of  Calvin  and  John  a  Lasco.  Each  prepared  sketches- 
5  (49) 


50 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  HEIDELBERG  CONFESSION. 


or  drafts,  and  "the  final  preparation  was  the  work  of 
botli  these  theologians,  with  the  constant  co-operation 
of  Frederick  III.  Ursinus  has  always  been  regarded  as 
the  chief  author,  as  he  was  afterward  the  principal 
defender  and  interpreter  of  the  Catechism ;  still,  it 
would  appear  that  the  nervous  German  style,  the  divi- 
sion into  three  parts  (as  distinguished  from  the  five  parts 
in  the  Catechism  of  Calvin,  and  the  previous  draft  of 
Ursinus),  and  the  genial  warmth  and  unction  of  the 
whole  work,  are  chiefly  due  to  Olevianus. "  (Schaff,  in 
Am.  Pres.  Rev.,  July,  1863,  p.  379.)  Philip  Schaff,  of 
New  York,  is  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the  Reformed 
Church  in  America.  When  the  Catechism  was  com- 
pleted, Frederick  laid  it  before  a  synod  of  the  superin- 
tendents of  the  Palatinate,  December,  1562,  and  after  a 
careful  examination  it  was  duly  approved.  Dr.  Schaff 
observes,  in  the  same  Review  from  which  we  have 
already  quoted,  that  "the  Catechism  is  a  true  expres- 
sion of  the  convictions  of  its  authors,  but  it  communi- 
cates only  so  much  of  these  as  is  in  harmony  with  the 
public  faith  of  the  Church,  and  observes  a  certain  reti- 
cence or  reservation  and  moderation  on  such  doctrines 
(as  the  twofold  predestination),  which  belong  rather  to 
scientific  theology  and  private  conviction  than  to  a  pub- 
lic church  confession  and  the  instruction  of  youth." 

The  Heidelberg  Catechism  contains  substantially  the 
same  tenets,  dogmas,  traditions,  speculations  and  private 
opinions  that  are  found  in  all  Protestant  creeds,  except 
in  governmental  affairs.  In  common  with  all  creeds, 
whether  Romanist  or  Protestant,  it  teaches  infant  bap- 
tism and  sprinkling.  The  body  of  people  which  it 
represents  is  called  the  Reformed  Church,  and  this 
Reformed  Church  is  regarded  by  its  theologians  and 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


51 


admirers  as  a  decided  improvement  upon  the  Lutheran 
Church ;  that  is  to  say,  there  is  not  as  much  Roniatiisin 
in  the  Heidelberg  Catechism  as  there  is  in  the  Augs- 
burg Confession.  The  theologians  and  princes  of  Ger- 
many and  Switzerland  began  reformation  with  the  Bible, 
and  ended  their  work  by  the  substitution  of  creeds, 
confessions  of  faith,  symbols  of  faith,  church  standards, 
etc.  Taking  the  Bible  as  their  guide,  they  beat  a 
retreat  from  the  mystic  realms  of  Papal  Babylon,  but 
had  not  gone  far  until  the  leaders  commanded  a  halt, 
when  they  went  to  work,  while  still  under  the  potent 
influence  of  Rome,  and  formulated  Confessions  of  Faith; 
and,  wedded  to  these  human  inventions,  as  their  sup- 
porters now  are,  they  still  dwell  within  the  confines  of 
old  Babylon.  If  not  ecclesiastically  under  the  power  of 
the  "Mother  Church,"  they  are  religiously  and  spirit- 
ually of  the  same  affinities.  None  of  these  creeds, 
whether  Catholic  or  Protestant,  tells  a  man  how  to 
become  a  Christian.  They  tell  a  man  how  he  may 
become  a  Catholic,  a  Lutheran,  a  Reformer,  an  Episco- 
palian, a  Presbyterian,  a  Methodist,  a  Baptist,  perchance. 
There  is  not  a  Confession  of  Faith  in  existence  that  ever 
saved  a  soul.  As  human  compositions,  one  is  just  as 
full  of  light  and  knowledge  as  another,  and  just  as  effica- 
cious in  the  .salvation  of  the  soul.  They  all  originated 
in  the  councils  of  men  ;  they  were  digested  in  the  heat 
of  human  passions;  they  were  concocted  and  planned  by 
envious  and  rival  theologians  ;  they  became  the  symbols 
—  the  insignia  —  of  rival  princes;  they  have  always 
engendered  strife,  hatred,  malice,  bigotry,  intolerance 
and  persecution,  and  will  continue  to  do  so  until  the 
end  of  time.  There  is  no  Christian  love  in  them  ;  there 
is  nothing  in  them  that  will  unite  the  people  of  God 


52 


ORIGIN  OF  THU  HEIDI- LBERG  CONFESSION. 


and  make  them  one  people.  The  mind  of  God  is  not 
found  in  them,  and  the  spirit  of  Christ  does  not  breathe 
through  them.  They  confuse  the  human  mind  ;  they 
divide  the  counsels  of  Christians ;  they  paralyze  the 
power  of  truth ;  they  make  a  fable  of  the  gospel  ;  they 
mock  the  prayers  of  the  Savior;  they  make  void  the 
law  of  God  ;  they  infuse  the  spirit  of  sectarianism  ;  they 
cramp  the  human  intellect ;  they  place  insuperable  bar- 
riers between  tnose  seeking  love  and  unity  upon  the 
basis  of  the  Bible. 

In  view  of  these  facts,  and  many  more  yet  to  be  pro- 
duced, let  our  brethren  understand  that  our  mission  is 
not  yet  ended,  but,  on  the  contrary,  only  fairly  begun. 
We  have  no  human  creed  to  defend.  The  Bible,  and 
the  Bible  only,  is  our  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  The 
word  of  God  only  is  the  man  of  our  counsel.  All  creeds 
nmst  be  crushed  under  the  weight  of  divine  authority. 
"The  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace"  must 
destroy  all  sectism.  There  must  be  but  one  fold  and 
one  Shepherd.  We  are  set  for  the  defense  of  the  gospel 
of  the  Son  of  God,  and  we  propose  to  walk  in  the  old 
paths.  We  propose  the  restoration  of  the  apostolic 
order  of  things.  To  this  work  we  consecrate  our  life's 
blood.  Upon  this  altar  we  lay  our  all.  We  trust  that 
all  those  who  have  been  called  into  this  marvelous  light 
will  stand  firm,  and  work  and  contend  for  the  faith,  and 
show  themselves  men  in  the  highest  sense  of  the  word,, 
and  never,  never,  yield  an  iota  of  the  truth. 


JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM 


It  is  not  our  purpose,  nor  is  it  necessary  to  the  end 
we  have  in  view,  to  trace  the  Lutheran  Reformation  as 
it  spread  all  through  the  Scandinavian  kingdom,  pene- 
trated the  Slavonic  nations,  and  took  Hungary  captive. 
We  shall  next  have  something  to  say  about  John  Calvin 
and  his  theology. 

In  French  Switzerland,  the  reformatory  movement 
began  in  1526,  in  the  French  parts  of  the  cantons  Berne 
and  Biel,  where  the  principles  of  reform  were  preached 
by  William  Farel,  a  native  of  France.  In  1530  he 
established  the  Reformation  in  Neufchatel.  A  begin- 
ning was  made  in  Geneva  as  early  as  1528;  in  1534, 
after  a  religious  conference  held  at  the  suggestion  of  the 
people  of  Berne,  in  which  Farel  defended  the  Reforma- 
tion, public  worship  was  granted  to  those  who  belonged 
to  the  Reformed  branch  ;  rapid  progress  was  then  made 
through  the  zeal  of  Farel,  Froment  and  Viret ;  and  in 
1535,  after  another  disputation,  the  Papacy  was  abol- 
ished by  the  Council,  and  the  doctrines  of  the  Reforma- 
tion adopted.  In  1536  John  Calvin  arrived  in  Geneva, 
and  was  induced  by  Farel  to  remain  in  the  city  and  to 
aid  him  in  his  struggle  against  a  party  of  free-thinkers 
who  called  themselves  Spintiials.  In  October  of  the 
same  year  he  took  part  with  Farel  and  Viret  in  a  relig- 
ious disputation  held  at  Lausanne,  which  resulted  in 
gaining  over  the  Pays-de-Vaud  to  the  cause  of  the 
Reformation.      In   1538  both  Farel  and  Calvin  were 

(53  J 


54 


JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 


banished  by  the  Council,  which  liad  taken  offense  at  the 
very  strict  church  discipHne  introduced  by  the  reform- 
ers. S6on,  however,  the  friends  of  th.e  Reformation 
regained  the  ascendency,  and  Calvin  was  recalled  in 
1 541,  while  Farel  remained  in  Neufchatel.  For  several 
years  Calvin  was  put  under  the  necessity  of  sustaining  a 
desperate  struggle  against  his  opponents,  but  in  1555 
they  were  finally  subdued  in  an  insurrection  incited  by 
one  Ami  Perrin.  From  that  time  forward  the  reforma- 
tory ideas  of  Calvin  were  carried  through  in  both  Church 
and  State  with  a  consistency  as  rigid  as  iron,  and 
Geneva  became  a  center  whence  reformatory  influences 
spread  to  the  remotest  parts  of  Europe.  By  an  exten- 
sive correspondence  and  numerous  theological  theses, 
he  exerted  a  powerful  personal  influence  upon  a  certain 
class  of  minds  far  beyond  the  boundaries  of  Switzerland. 
The  theological  academy  of  Geneva,  founded  in  1588, 
supplied  the  churches  of  many  foreign  countries,  espe- 
cially France,  with  preachers  trained  in  the  spirit  of 
Calvin.  When  Calvin  died,  in  1564,  the  continuation 
of  his  work  devolved  upon  the  learned  Theodore  Beza. 
Calvin  disagreed  in  many  points  with  Zwingle,  whose 
views  gradually  lost  ground  as  those  of  Calvin  advanced. 
The  Second  Helvetic  Confession,  the  most  important 
among  the  symbolical  books  of  the  Reformed  Church, 
which  was  compiled  by  Bullinger  in  Zurich,  published 
in  1566,  and  recognized  in  all  Reformed  countries,  com- 
pleted, we  are  told,  the  superiority  of  Calvin's  reforma- 
tory notions  over  those  of  Zwingle. 

Calvin  was  only  eight  years  old  when  Luther  posted 
his  famous  theses  upon  the  door  of  the  Cathedral  in 
Wittenberg.  He  was  born  at  Noyon,  in  Picardy,  on 
the  loth  of  July,  1 509.     lie  was  well  provided  for  by 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


55 


families  of  nobility,  who  assisted  him  in  obtaining  a 
splendid  education  in  the  best  colleges  of  Paris.  His 
physical  constitution  was  not  strong,  but  early  in  life  he 
developed  extraordinary  intellectual  power.  He  was 
raised  in  affluence,  and  was  never  subjected  to  penury 
and  rough  discipline,  as  were  the  German  and  Swiss 
reformers.  In  college  he  surpassed  his  companions  in 
severe  mental  application,  and  in  a  natural  aptitude  to 
learn.  He  spent  most  of  his  time  by  him'self,  and  from 
his  serious  and  severe  turn  of  mind,  he  was  nicknamed 
by  his  companions,  "The  Accusative  Case."  At  the 
age  of  eighteen  he  received  the  tonsure,  and  preached 
occasionally,  but  had  not  taken  orders,  as  his  father, 
changing  his  plan,  concluded  to  qualify  him  for  the  pro- 
fession of  a  jurist.  He  studied  under  the  most  cele- 
brated teachers.  Before  long,  however,  his  attention 
was  directed  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  through  the 
influence  of  Protestant  relatives.  Little  is  known  of  his 
public  career  until  about  1532,  soon  after  which  he  gives 
an  account  of  his  "  sudden  conversion."  "  Calvin  had 
hesitated  about  becoming  a  Protestant,  out  of  reverence 
for  the  Church.  But  he  so  modified  his  conception  of 
the  Church  as  to  perceive  that  the  change  did  not 
involve  a  renunciation  of  it.  Membership  in  the  true 
Church  was  consistent  with  renouncing  the  rule  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  prelacy :  for  the  Church,  in  its  essence 
invisible,  exists  in  a  true  form  wherever  the  gospel  is 
faithfully  preached  and  the  sacraments  administered 
conformably  to  the  directions  of  Christ."  So  says 
George  P.  Fisher,  D.  D.,  in  his  History  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, pp.  195-6. 

Calvin,  by  his  great  learning,  by  the  rare  acuteness 
of  his  intellect,  and  by  his  extensive  acquaintance  with 


56 


JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 


the  contents  of  the  Bible,  became  an  acknowledged 
leader  of  the  Protestant  party  in  France.  Speaking  of 
Calvin's  characteristics  as  a  writer  and  a  man,  Professor 
Fisher  says:  "His  direct  influence  was  predominantly 
and  almost  exclusively  upon  the  higher  classes  of  soci- 
ety. He  and  his  system  acted  powerfully  upon  the 
people,  but  indirectly  through  the  agency  of  others. 
He  was  a  patrician  in  his  temperament.  By  his  early 
associations,  and  as  an  effect  of  his  culture,  he  acquired 
a  certain  refinement  and  decided  affinities  for  the  class 
elevated  by  birth  or  education.  This  was  one  of  his 
points  of  dissimilarity  to  Luther;  he  was  not  fitted,  like 
the  German  reformer,  to  come  home  to  the  '  business 
and  bosoms'  of  common  men.  He  had  not  the  popular 
eloquence  of  Luther,  nor  had  he  the  genius  that  left  its 
impress  on  the  words  and  works  of  the  Saxon  reformer  ; 
but  he  was  a  more  exact  and  finished  scholar  than 
Luther."  Melancthon  greeted  Calvin  as  "the  theolo- 
gian," and  by  the  enemies  of  Protestantism  his  work  was 
styled  "the  Koran  of  the  heretics."  A  contemporary 
writer  thus  spoke  of  him  : 

"  Some  think  on  Calvin  heaven's  own  mantle  fell, 
While  others  deemed  him  an  instrument  of  hell." 

Professedly  he  adopted  the  Bible  as  the  sole  standard 
of  doctrine,  while  at  the  .same  time  he  made  his  peculiar 
speculation  of  predestination  to  overshadow  the  whole 
Bible,  and  to  render  nugatory  the  revealed  plan  of  sal- 
vation. While  his  "Institutes"  show  him  to  be  a  very 
acute  critic  and  a  profound  exegetical  writer,  yet  at  the 
same  time  it  is  apparent  that  by  his  theocratic  interpre- 
tations of  Scripture  he  renders  the  gospel  of  Christ  a 
myth.  While  he  scouts  the  doctrine  that  the  truth  of 
the  Bible  rests  on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


57 


holds  that  the  divine  authority  of  the  Bible  can  be  estab- 
lished by  reason,  he  at  the  same  time  maintains  that  a 
spiritual  insight  of  gospel  truth  is  imparted  directly  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  While  he  professes  little  esteem  for 
the  fathers  of  the  Church,  and  while  he  stigmatizes  the 
domas  and  rites  of  the  Papacy  as  the  "impious  inven- 
tions of  men,"  without  warrant  from  the  Word  of  God, 
yet  at  the  same  time,  unlike  the  other  reformers,  he 
frequently  pays  deference  to  the  Church.  Believing  in 
a  Church  Invisible,  composed  of  true  believers,  and  also 
believing  in  the  Church  Visible,  the  criteria  of  which  are 
the  proper  administration  of  the  Sacraments  and  the 
teaching  of  the  Word,  and  theoretically  demanding  pos- 
itive submission  to  the  model  of  the  New  Testament,  he 
at  the  same  time  fails  to  identify  the  Apostolic  Church 
in  its  complete  restoration  and  purity.  The  smell  of  the 
Papacy  tinges  much  of  his  writings.  Professor  Fisher 
thus  summarizes  the  peculiar  theological  tenets  of 
Calvin : 

Predestination  to  liim  is  the  correlate  of  human  dependence ;  the 
counterpart  of  the  doctrine  of  grace ;  the  antithesis  to  salvation  by 
merit ;  the  implied  consequences  of  man's  complete  bondage  to  sin. 
In  election,  it  is  involved  that  man's  salvation  is  not  his  own  worlc, 
but,  wholly,  the  work  of  the  grace  of  God;  and  in  election,  also,  there 
is  laid  a  sure  foundation  for  the  believer's  security  under  all  the 
assaults  of  temptation.  It  is  practical  interest  which  Calvin  is  sedu- 
lous to  guard  ;  he  clings  to  the  doctrine  for  what  he  considers  its  relig- 
ious value  ;  and  it  is  no  more  than  justice  to  him  to  remember  that  he 
habitually  styles  the  tenet,  which  proved  to  be  so  obnoxious,  an 
unfathomable  mystery,  an  abyss  into  which  no  mortal  mind  can 
descend.  And,  whether  consistently  or  not,  there  is  the  most  earnest 
assertion  of  the  moral  and  responsible  nature  of  man.  Augustine  held 
that  in  the  fall  of  Adam,  the  entire  race  was  involved  in  a  common 
act  and  a  common  catastroplie.  The  will  is  not  destroyed  ;  it  is  still 
free  to  sin,  but  is  utterly  disabled  as  regards  holiness.  Out  of  the 
mass  of  mankind,  all  oi"  >\hom  are  alike  guilty,  God  chooses  a  part  to 


58  JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 

be  the  recipients  of  his  mercy,  whom  he  purifies  by  an  irresistible 
influence,  but  leaves  the  rest  to  suffer  the  penalty  which  they  have 
justly  brought  upon  themselves.  In  the  "Institutes,"  Calvin  does 
what  Luther  had  done  in  his  book  against  Erasmus ;  he  makes  the  Fall 
itself,  the  primal  transgression,  the  object  of  an  efficient  decree.  In 
this  particular  he  goes  beyond  Augustine,  and  apparently  affords  a 
sanction  to  the  extreme,  or  supralapsarian  type  of  theology,  which 
afterward  found  numerous  defenders — which  traces  sin  to  the  direct 
agency  of  God,  and  even  founds  the  distinction  of  right  and  wrong 
ultimately  on  his  omnipotent  will  (Inst.  III.,  xxiii.,  6,  seq.)  But  when 
Calvin  was  called  upon  to  define  his  doctrine  more  carefully,  as  in  the 
Consensus  Genevensis,  he  confines  himself  to  the  assertion  of  a  permissive 
decree — a  volitive  permission — in  the  case  of  the  first  sin.  In  other 
words,  he  does  not  overstep  the  Augustinian  position.  He  explicitly 
avers  that  every  decree  of  the  Almighty  springs  from  reasons  which, 
though  hidden  from  us,  are  good  and  sufficient ;  that  is  to  say,  he 
founds  will  upon  right,  and  not  right  upon  will.  He  differs,  however, 
both  from  Augustine  and  Luther,  in  affirming  that  none  who  are  once 
converted  fall  from  a  state  of  grace,  the  number  of  believers  being 
coextensive  with  the  number  of  the  elect. 

Calvin  lives  in  history  as  a  scholar  and  a  theologian, 
but  not  as  a  reformer.  He  rendered  valuable  service  as 
an  interpreter  and  expounder  of  Scriptures,  but,  like 
Luther,  Zwingle  and  Knox,  he  failed  to  restore  the 
primitive  apostolic  order  of  things.  His  speculations, 
theologically  known  as  Predestination,  Total  Hereditary 
Depravity,  Particular  Election,  Reprobation,  Final  Per- 
severance and  the  Eternal  Decrees,  have  only  served 
the  purpose  of  dividing  the  people  of  God  instead  of 
uniting  them — have  only  perplexed  and  confused  the 
human  mind  instead  of  making  plain  the  simplicity  of 
the  gospel.  It  is  said  of  Calvin  by  his  biographers,  that 
at  times  he  was  so  carried  away  by  gusts  of  passion, 
that  he  lost  all  self-control.  He  had  tried  in  vain,  he 
says,  to  ' '  tame  the  wild  beast  of  his  anger  "  ;  and  on  his 
death-bed  he  asked  pardon  of  the  Senate  of  Geneva  for 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


59 


outbursts  of  passion,  while  at  the  same  time  he  thanked 
them  for  their  forbearance. 

Calvin,  by  instinct  and  choice,  was  better  fitted  for 
the  rigid  theocracy  of  Moses  than  for  the  liberty  of  the 
gospel.  He  had  a  stronger  inclination  toward  M'osaic 
legislation  than  toward  a  system  of  divine  truth  which 
makes  the  individual  free.  He  ruled  with  a  rod  of  iron 
in  the  city  of  Geneva,  where  he  directed  civil  as  well  as 
ecclesiastical  affairs.  "In  1568,  under  the  stern  code 
which  was  established  under  the  auspices  of  Calvin,  a 
child  was  beheaded  for  striking  its  father  and  mother. 
A  child  sixteen  years  old,  for  attemptmg  to  strike  its 
mother,  was  sentenced  to  death  ;  but,  on  account  of  its 
youth,  the  sentence  was  commuted,  and  having  been 
publicly  whipped,  with  a  cord  about  its  neck,  it  was 
banished  from  the  city.  In  1565  a  woman  was  chastised 
with  rods  for  singing  songs  to  the  melody  of  the  Psalms. " 
And  other  inflictions  are  recorded  too  numerous  to 
mention.  The  expulsion  of  Castellio  from  Geneva,  a 
highly  cultivated  scholar  whom  Calvin  had  brought  from 
Strasburg,  to  take  charge  of  the  Geneva  school — an 
expulsion  caused  by  the  influence  of  Calvin  himself — 
and  the  death  of  Servetus,  instigated  by  Calvin,  and 
executed  by  those  directly  under  his  influence,  because 
Servetus  wrote  a  book  entitled  "  Errors  of  the  Trinity," 
which  contradicted  the  opinions  of  Calvin — these  heart- 
less acts  indicate  the  temper  of  Calvin's  spirit,  these 
show  the  character  of  his  cold  intellect,  these  demon- 
strate the  rigidity  and  inflexibility  of  his  will  power. 
The  powerful  intellect  of  such  a  man  may  excite  the 
admiration  of  cold-hearted  theologians,  and  overawe  the 
ignorant  and  superstitious  with  amazement,  but  such  a 
disposition  can  never  command  the  love  and  affection 


6o 


JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 


of  the  "common  people."  In  our  opinion,  there  is 
nothing  in  Calvinism  but  the  defeat  of  Christianity — 
there  is  nothing  in  it  on  which  a  sinful  and  helpless 
world  can  lean  for  support.  There  is  not  a  gleam  of 
hope  in  it.    It  is  a  death-dealing  system. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


We  headed  this  series  of  articles  Reformatory  Move- 
ments. It  may  become  evident  before  we  conclude,  that 
the  series  should  have  been  designated  A  History  of  the 
Protestant  Denominations,  for  the  reason  that  many  of 
them  do  not  contain  the  elements  of  religious  reforma- 
tion at  all. 

The  principles  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation  swept 
across  the  English  Channel,  and  seized  the  people  of  the 
British  Empire.  But,  as  might  have  been  expected,  the 
heresies  of  Luther  and  of  Wickliffe  met  with  intense 
and  malicious  opposition  from  the  start.  King  Henry 
VIII.,  at  the  outbreak  of  the  politico-religious  revolu- 
tion, became  a  conspicuous  opponent  of  Luther,  as  well 
as  a  champion  of  the  Papal  cause.  For  writing  a 
polemical  book  against  Luther  upon  the  Seven  Sac- 
raments, Leo  X.  conferred  upon  the  King  the  title 
"Defender  of  the  Faith"  {Defensor  Fidei).  This  took 
place  in  1521.  Henry  also  addressed  a  letter  to  the 
Emperor  of  Germany,  in  which  he  demanded  the  extir- 
pation of  the  heretics.  But  the  doctrines  of  Luther 
found  ardent  adherents  even  at  the  English  universities, 
and  an  English  translation  of  the  Bible,  by  Frith  and 
Tyndale,  members  of  the  University  of  Cambridge, 
produced  a  decisive  and  salutary  effect.  It  was  not 
long,  however,  until  King  Henry  had  a  quarrel  with  the 
Pope,  because  the  latter  refused  to  annul  Henry's  mar- 
riage with   Catharine  of  Aragon,  the  niece  of  the 

(61) 


62 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


Emperor  Charles  V.  Henry,  who  represented  that  his 
marriage  with  Catharine,  his  brother's  widow,  was  open 
to  objections,  laid  the  matter,  by  advice  of  Thomas 
Cranmer,  before  the  universities  of  Europe,  "not  ab- 
staining, however,  from  the  use  of  bribery  abroad  and 
of  menaces  at  home;"  but  when  replies  came  back 
declaring  the  marriage  with  a  brother's  wife  null  and 
void,  the  King  separated  from  Catharine,  married  Anne 
Boleyn,  and,  as  a  consequence,  fell  under  the  Papal  ban. 

Through  the  conniving  of  Henry,  the  English  Parlia- 
ment was  induced  to  sunder  the  connection  between 
England  and  Rome,  and  to  recognize  the  King  as  head 
of  the  new  Church.  It  became  the  fixed  purpose  of 
Henry  to  destroy,  if  possible,  the  influence  of  the  Pope 
over  the  Church  of  England,  with  a  desire  at  the  same 
time  to  preserve  its  Catholic  character.  As  a  revenge 
upon  the  Pope,  he  subjected  the  cloisters  to  a  searching 
investigation  in  1535,  and  in  the  following  year  he 
totally  abolished  them.  In  1538  the  Bible  was  diffused 
in  the  mother  tongue  as  the  only  source  of  doctrine ; 
"  but  the  statute  of  1539  imposed  distinct  limits  upon 
the  Reformation,  and,  in  particular,  confirmed  transub- 
stantiation,  priestly  celibacy,  masses  for  the  dead,  and 
auricular  confession."  After  the  Pope's  authority  was 
abolished  in  England,  Parliament  passed  the  Act  of 
Supremacy,  "That  the  King,  our  sovereign  lord,  his 
heirs  and  successors,  kings  of  this  realm,  shall  be 
taken,  accepted,  and  reputed  the  only  supreme  head  in 
earth  of  the  Church  of  England,  called  the  Anglicana 
Ecclesia. " 

And  this  was  the  origin  of  the  Episcopal  Church ! 
Up  to  this  memorable  event  the  Pope  of  Rome  was 
recognized  as  head  of  the  Church  of  England;  now 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


63 


Henry  VIII.  becomes  head  of  the  Church,  and  the 
ecclesiastical  are  brought  into  subjection  to  the  civil 
powers.  Many  of  those  who  refused  to  submit  to  the 
new  order  of  things  in  England,  were  executed,  and 
their  goods  confiscated  by  the  loyal  but  servile  minions 
of  the  English  king.  It  is  evident  that  while  Henry 
was  a  Protestant  in  form,  he  was  a  Romanist  in  heart. 
A  powerful  party,  headed  by  Thomas  Cranmer,  after- 
ward Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  Thomas  Cromwell, 
royal  vicar-general  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  exerted  a 
silent  influence  toward  the  Reformed  churches  of  Con- 
tinental Europe.  They  met  with  little  success  during 
the  reign  of  Henry,  but  gained  a  temporary  ascendency 
in  the  regency  which  ruled  England  during  the  minority 
of  Edward  VI.  Certain  parties,  including  Peter  Martyr, 
Bucer  and  Fagius,  were  invited  to  England  to  aid  Cran- 
mer in  establishing  the  Reformation.  The  basis  was 
laid  in  the  Book  of  Homilies  (1547),  the  new  English 
Liturgy  (the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  1548),  and  the 
Forty-two  Articles,  1552;  but  the  labors  of  Cranmer 
were  interrupted  by  the  death  of  Edward  VI.,  in  1553. 
His  successor.  Queen  Mary,  the  daughter  of  Henry  and 
Catharine  of  Aragon,  was,  as  the  intelligent  reader 
knows,  a  devoted  partisan  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
during  whose  bloody  reign  Cranmer  and  from  three  to 
four  hundred  other  persons  were  executed  on  account 
of  their  religious  views.  A  Papal  nuncio  appeared  in 
England,  and  an  obsequious  Parliament  sanctioned  the 
reunion  with  Rome ;  but  the  affections  of  the  people 
were  not  regained,  and  the  early  death  of  Mary,  in 
1558,  put  an  end  to  the  official  restoration  of  the  Papal 
Church.  Queen  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  of  Henry  and 
Anne  Boleyn,  whose  birth,  in  consequence  of  the  Papal 


64 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


decision,  was  regarded  by  the  Roman  Catholics  as  ille- 
gitimate, resumed  the  work  of  her  father,  and  completed 
the  English  Reformation,  as  a  work  distinct  both  from 
the  Church  of  Rome  and  the  Reformation  of  Germany 
and  Switzerland. 


THE  THIRTY-NINE  ARTICLES. 


The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  which  had  been 
adopted  under  Edward  VI.,  was  so  changed  as  to  be 
less  offensive  to  the  Romish  party  ;  and  by  the  Act  of 
Uniformity,  June,  1559,  ^^'^'^  made  binding  on  all  the 
churches  of  the  kingdom.  Most  of  the  subjects  of  the 
Pope  conformed.  The  Confession  of  Faith,  which  had 
been  formulated  under  Edward,  in  forty-two  articles, 
was  reduced  to  thirty-nine  articles,  and  in  this  form  it 
was  adopted  by  a  convocation  of  the  clergy,  at  London, 
in  1562,  and  by  Parliament  made,  in  1571,  the  rule  of 
faith  for  all  the  clergy  of  the  realm.  According  to  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles,  the  Scriptures  contain,  so  they  tell 
us,  everything  necessary  to  salvation.  We  are  further 
informed  that  justification  is  through  faith  alone,  which 
article,  we  presume,  was  intended  as  an  offset  to  the 
Romish  doctrine  of  justification  by  works  alone,  or  the 
doctrine  of  indulgences ;  but  works  acceptable  to  God 
are  the  necessary  fruit  of  this  faith.  Of  course,  neither 
Christ  nor  his  apostles  was  consulted,  when  the  English 
Parliament  declared  that  supreme  power  over  the 
Church  is  vested  in  the  English  crown,  though  limited 
by  the  statutes.  Bishops  continued  to  be  the  highest 
ecclesiastical  officers  and  the  first  barons  of  the  realm, 
which,  it  must  be  confessed,  does  not  resemble  the  sim- 
plicity of  the  primitive  order.  Subscription  to  the 
Articles  was  made  binding  on  the  clergy;  freedom  of 
conscience  was  granted  to  the  laity.    The  adoption  of 

6  (65) 


66 


THE  THIRTY-NINE  ARTICLES. 


the  Thirty-nine  Articles  completed,  substantially,  the 
Constitution  of  the  Episcopal  Church  of  England.  Some 
parts  of  the  Church  government  and  the  Liturgy,  espe- 
cially the  retaining  of  sacerJotal  vestments,  gave  great 
offense  to  a  number  <yl  ^ealous  people,  of  a  radical  turn 
of  mind,  who  had  suffered  persecution  during  the  reign 
of  Mary,  and,  while  exiles,  had  become  strongly  attached 
to  the  extreme  dogmas  of  Calvinism.  They  demanded 
a  greater  purity  of  the  Church  (hence  the  origin  of  the 
term  "Puritans"),  a  simple,  spiritual  form  of  worship, 
a  strict  church  discipline,  and  a  Presbyterian  form  of 
government.  The  Act  of  Uniformity,  in  1559,  threat- 
ened all  Non-conformists  with  fines  and  imprisonment, 
and  their  ministers  with  deposition  and  banishment. 
When  the  provisions  of  the  Act  began  to  be  enforced, 
a  number  of  the  Non-conformist  ministers  formed  sepa- 
rate congregations  in  connection  with  presbyteries, 
subsequent  to  1572,  and  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
ministers  and  laity  of  the  Established  Church  sympa- 
thized with  them.  The  rupture  between  the  parties 
was  widened  when,  in  1592,  by  an  act  of  Parliament  it 
was  decreed  that  all  who  obstinately  refused  to  attend 
public  worship,  or  mduced  others  to  do  so,  should  be 
imprisoned  and  submit,  or  after  three  months  be  ban- 
ished;  and  again,  in  1595,  when  the  Presbyterians 
applied  the  Mo.saic  Sabbath  laws  to  the  Lord's-day,  and 
when  Calvin's  doctrines  respecting  Predestination  excited 
bitter  and  lengthy  disputes. 

Thus  far,  by  the  aid  of  history,  we  have  learned  that 
Henry  VIII..  a  very  dissolute  king,  was  constituted 
head  of  the  English  Church,  or  the  Episcopal  Church, 
called  so  by  the  fact  that  all  church  government  is 
lodged  in  a  bench  of  lordly  bishops,  that  the  Book  of 


REFORMATOKV  MOVEMENTS. 


67 


Prayer  was  adopted,  which  was  patterned  after  the 
Roman  Catholic  Missal,  and  that  the  Thirty-nine  Arti- 
cles, which  it  is  not  necessary  to  insert  here,  became 
the  Creed  of  the  English  Church.  On  the  general 
character  of  the  Anglican  or  English  Church,  George  P. 
Fisher,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  Yale  Col- 
lege, has  this  to  say : 

As  head  of  the  Church,  the  King  could  make  and  deprive  bishops, 
as  he  could  appoint  and  degrade  all  other  officers  in  the  kingdom. 
The  Episcopal  polity  was  retained,  partly  because  the  bishops  gener- 
ally fell  in  with  the  proceedings  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  for  the 
reform  of  the  Church,  and  on  account  of  the  compact  organization  of 
the  Monarchy,  in  consequence  of  which  the  nation  acted  as  one  body. 
But  in  the  first  age  of  the  Reformation,  and  until  the  rise  of  Puritan- 
ism as  a  distinct  party,  there  was  little  controversy  among  Protosfants 
in  relation  to  Episcopacy.  Not  only  was  Melancthon  willing  to  allow 
bishops  with  a.  jure  kumuno  authority,  but  Luther  and  Calvin  were  also 
uf  the  same  mind.  The  Episcopal  Constitution  of  the  English  Churcii 
for  a  long  period  put  no  barrier  in  the  way  of  the  most  free  and  fra- 
ternal relations  between  that  body  and  the  Protestant  churches  on  the 
Continent.  As  we  have  seen,  Cranmer  placed  foreign  divines  in  very 
responsible  places  in  the  English  Church.  Ministers  who  had  received 
Presbyterian  ordination  were  admitted  to  take  ciiarge  of  English  par- 
ishes without  a  question  as  to  the  validity  of  their  orders. — History  of 
tite  Rejormation,  pp.  332-3. 

"The  feature,"'  says  Professor  Fisher,  "that  distin 
guished  the  English  Church  from  the  Reformed  Churches 
on  the  Continent,  was  the  retention  in  its  polity  and 
worship  of  so  much  that  had  belonged  to  the  Catholic 
system."  And  the  Episcopal  Church  is  to  this  day 
essentially  Catholic.  The  English  Church  owes  its  exist- 
ence more  to  a  stroke  of  political  policy  {coup  d'etat) 
than  to  a  deep  conviction  of  the  supremacy  of  truth. 
The  supremacy  of  the  King  himself  was  deemed  of 
vastly  more  importance  than  the  supremacy  of  apostolic 
truth.    In  all  these  controversies  the  Church  of  Christ, 


68 


THE  THIRTY-NINE  ARTICLES. 


as  founded  by  the  apostles,  was  not  once  thoroughly 
and  distinctively  identified.  No  plan  of  salvation  is 
defined.  The  Bible  is  translated,  which,  for  the  times, 
was  a  memorable  event,  and  one  fraught  with  far-reach- 
ing consequences.  The  translation  of  the  Bible  into  the 
vernacular  of  the  people  was  the  harbinger  of  both  the 
civil  and  religious  liberty  of  modern  times.  Great  rev- 
olutionary principles  were  abstracted  from  the  Bible, 
and  many  proof-texts  from  the  Bible  furnished  matter 
for  divisive  and  contradictory  creeds,  but  the  Bible 
itself  as  an  infallible  guide,  and  as  containing  the  divine 
system  of  salvation,  was  laid  upon  the  .shelf  as  a  useless 
piece  of  lumber.  The  controversialists  of  that  period 
scarcely  ever  made  an  appeal  to  the  Word  of  God  in 
their  efforts  to  sustain  their  respective  dogmas  and  the- 
ories. While  they  all  acknowledged  the  supremacy  of 
the  Scriptures,  and  in  a  general  way  deferred  to  them, 
yet  the  facts  go  to  show  that  the  truth  of  the  Bible  was 
nullified  and  the  power  of  the  gospel  paralyzed  by 
savage  and  ceaseless  controversies — by  controversies 
between  the  defenders  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and 
the  advocates  of  the  Heidelberg  Catechism— by  polem- 
ical struggles  between  Luther  and  Zwingle — by  angry 
disputes  between  the  King  of  England  and  the  Pope  of 
Rome,  and  by  repeated  wrangles  of  opposing  Councils. 
Dogmas  were  popularized,  creeds  were  stereotyped, 
human  opinions  were  consecrated,  metaphysical  specula- 
tions furnished  food  for  the  common  mind,  and  doctrinal 
statements,  essentially  dead,  and  wholly  inoperative, 
were  made  to  occupy  the  place  of  a  living  Bible. 

Why  did  not  the  "  Reformers"  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury continue  as  they  had  begun  ?  Who  authorized 
them  to  make  creeds  and  catechisms,  and  to  formulate 


REFORMATOKV  MOVLMENTS. 


69 


-church  standards  ?  Why  did  they  occupy  more  time  in 
discussing  Transubstantiation  and  Predestination — both 
metaphysical  and  untaught  questions,  and  net  compre- 
hensible by  the  common  people,  and  on  which  no  man's 
salvation  depends — than  they  spent  in  preaching  and 
teaching  just  what  the  apostles  preached  and  taught? 
The  followers  of  the  Reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century 
have  had  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  in  which  to  fol- 
low up  the  apostles,  but  up  to  this  time  they  have  not 
found  them. 


THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 


A  HISTORY  of  the  origin  and  development  of  Church 
Creeds  is  indeed  a  curious  and  entertaining,  if  not  a 
profitable,  study.  The  history  of  Creeds  is  not  a  his- 
tory of  genuine  reformation,  but  in  the  manufacture  of 
those  tests  of  church-fellowship  we  discover  the  mental 
and  spiritual  portraits  of  uninspired  men.  God  -'breathed 
into  man  the  breath  of  lives,"  but  creed-mongers  have 
breathed  into  creeds  the  putrid  breath  of  sectaries,  dog- 
matists, humanists,  traditionists,  sciolists,  scholastics, 
opinionists,  purists,  transcendentalists,  metaphysicians, 
and  so  forth.  God  made  the  Bible,  but  men  made 
creeds.  The  trail  of  the  serpent  is  found  in  every 
human  creed.  The  hope  of  the  world  is  to  be  found  in 
the  Bible  ;  the  hope  of  prelates  and  of  priests  —  the 
glowing  hope  of  all  sectarian  leaders — can  be  found  in 
diverse  Symbols  of  Faith,  in  the  figments  and  fancies  of 
creed  architects,  in  Church  Standards  which  divide  the 
people  of  one  common  Lord,  and  in  every  form  of 
"Systematic  Theology,"  which  furnishes  employment 
to  as  many  theologians,  and  to  as  many  distinct  parties, 
as  are  represented  by  these  varying  systems.  In  short, 
the  history  of  creed-making  is  the  history  of  human  pas- 
sion, human  prejudice,  human  bigotry,  superstition, 
ignorance  of  God's  Word,  human  ambition,  of  plots  and 
counterplots,  of  partisans,  of  strife,  of  theological  tour- 
naments, and  of  cunning  craftiness.     They  are  the 

{70) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS, 


71 


product  of  ingenious  men,  intellectually  acute,  skilled 
in  the  art  of  dialectics,  and  powerful  as  polemics. 

The  history  of  the  incubation  and  birth  of  the  English 
Prayer-book,  or  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  is  a  study 
that  will  tire  any  mind,  and  discourage  any  heart,  if  one 
has  no  other  object  in  view  except  the  mere  reading  of 
its  history.  It  is  but  just  to  say  that  the  men,  as  a 
class,  who  inflicted  creeds  upon  the  world,  were  better 
in  spirit  and  character  than  the  creeds  they  made ;  and 
that  whatever  of  goodness  and  greatness  they  possessed, 
and  that  whatever  of  purity  and  nobility  of  life  they 
manifested,  they  derived  directly  from  the  Word  of 
God  and  from  the  Fountain  of  Life ;  which  fact,  by 
itself  alone,  is  a  crushing  argument  against  all  creeds — 
even  against  "Revised  Creeds,"  as  at  present  proposed 
by  the  orthodox  world. 

Before  the  Reformation  of  Luther,  the  ]\Iissals,  Bre- 
viaries, etc.,  of  the  Church  of  Rome  were  in  use  in 
England.  In  1537  the  Convocation  put  forth  in  English 
Godly  and  Pious  Instiiution  of  a  Chris tian  Man,'" 
containing  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Creed,  the  Command- 
ments and  the  Ave  Maria.  In  1547,  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  VI.,  a  committee  was  appointed  to  draw  up  a 
Liturgy  in  English,  free  from  Popish  errors.  Cranmer, 
Ridley,  and  other  eminent  reformers,  composed  this 
committee,  and  their  book  was  confirmed  by  Parliament 
in  1548.  This  is  known  as  the  First  Prayer-book  of 
Edward  VI.  A  large  portion  of  it  was  taken  from  the 
old  services  used  in  England  before  the  Reformation  ; 
but  the  labors  of  Melancthon  and  Bucer  helped  to  give 
the  book  its  Protestant  form.  "  About  the  end  of  the 
year  1550  exceptions  were  taken  against  some  parts  of 
this  book,  and  Archbishop  Cranmer  proposed  a  new 


72 


THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 


review.  The  principal  alterations  occasioned  by  this 
second  review  were  the  addition  of  the  Sentences,  Exhor- 
tations, Confession  and  Absolution,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  morning  and  evening  services,  which  in  the  First 
Common  Prayer-book  began  with  the  Lord's  Prayer  ; 
the  addition  of  the  Commandments  at  the  beginning  of 
the  communion  office;  the  removing  of  some  rites  and 
ceremonies  retained  in  the  former  book,  such  as  the  use 
of  oil  in  confirmation,  the  unction  of  the  sick,  prayer; 
for  the  departed  souls,  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
at  the  consecration  of  the  Eucharist,  and  the  prayer  of 
oblation  that  used  to  follow  it  ;  the  omitting  the  rubric 
that  ordered  water  to  be  mixed  with  the  wine,  with  sev- 
eral other  less  material  variations.  The  habits,  likewise, 
which  were  prescribed  in  the  former  book  were  in  this 
laid  aside ;  and.  lastly,  a  rubric  was  added  at  the  end  of 
the  communion  office  to  explain  the  reason  of  kneeling 
at  the  Sacrament." — Hook.  The  Liturgy,  thus  revised 
and  altered,  was  again  confirmed  by  Parliament  in  155  i, 
and  is  cited  as  the  Second  Prayer-book  of  Edivard  VI. 
Queen  Mary,  on  her  accession,  repealed  the  acts  of 
Edward,  and  restored,  through  the  influence  of  her 
Papal  advisers,  the  Romanist  prayer-book.  "  On  the 
accession  of  Elizabeth  to  the  English  throne,  this  repeal, 
however,  was  reversed,  and  the  second  book  of  Edward 
VL,  with  several  alterations  and  emendations,  was  re-es- 
tablished. This  Liturgy  continued  in  use  during  the 
long  reign  of  Elizabeth,  and  received  further  additions 
and  improvements,  "—frt^^fe'  Eccles.  Enc. 

Early  in  the  reign  of  James  L  the  Prayer-book  was 
again  revised,  but  the  "improvements"  suggested  by 
James  were  not  ratified  by  Parliament.  In  166 1,  the 
year  after  the  restoration  of  Charles  IL,  the  commis- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


73 


■sioners,  both  Episcopal  and  Presbyterian,  who  had 
assembled  at  the  Savoy  to  revise  the  Liturgy,  having 
come  to  no  agreement,  the  Convocation  agreed  to 
certain  "alterations  and  additions. "  The  whole  book, 
being  finished,  passed  both  houses  of  Convocation  ;  it 
was  subscribed  to  by  bishops  and  clergy,  and  was  rati- 
fied by  act  of  Parliament,  and  received  the  royal  a-sent 
May  19,  1662.  This  was  the  last  revisal  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  in  which  any  alteration  was  made  by 
public  authority.  Several  attempts  have  been  made  to 
revise  the  book  since  1665,  but  without  success.  The 
first  attempt  was  made  in  the  reign  of  William  III., 
.encouraged  by  Tillotson  and  Stillingfleet,  who  in  1668 
liad  united  with  Bates,  Manton  and  Baxter  in  prepar- 
ing a  bill  for  the  "comprehension  of  Dissenters." 
Failing  then,  as  well  as  in  168 1,  the  scheme  was  re- 
sumed after  the  Revolution,  and  in  1689  a  commission 
was  formed  to  revise  the  Prayer-book.  A  number  of 
alterations  were  suggested,  in  order,  if  possible,  to 
gratify  the  Dissenters,  but  the  attempt  proved  abortive. 
There  is  at  the  present  time  a  Lihtrgicnl  Revision  Society 
in  England,  which,  in  its  Declaration  of  Principles  and 
Objects,  proposes  to  bring  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
"into  closer  conformity  with  the  written  word  of  God 
and  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  by  excluding  all 
those  e.vpre.ssions  which  have  been  assumed  to  counte- 
nance Romanizing  doctrine  or  practice." 

After  the  American  Revolution,  the  "  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church"  was  established  as  an  organization 
separate  from  the  Church  of  England,  in  1784.  In 
3786,  a  committee  was  appointed  to  adapt  the  English 
Liturgy  to  usj  in  America,  and  they  i:)repared  a  book, 
which,  however,  never  came  into  general  use. 


74 


THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON"  PRAYER. 


At  tlie  General  Couven'.iou  in  October,  1789,  the  whole  subject  of 
the  Liturgy  was  thrown  open  by  appointing  committees  0:1  tlie  difftr- 
ent  portions  of  the  Prayer-bocjk,  whose  several  reports,  with  the  action 
of  the  two  h<.uses  tliercupon,  were  consolidated  in  the  Eook  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  etc.,  as  it  is  now  in  use,  the  whole  book  being  ratified 
and  set  forth  by  a  vote  of  the  Convention  on  the  16th  of  October,  178!), 
its  use  being  prescribed  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  Octobt-r,  1790. 
The  American  Liturgy  retains  ail  that  is  excellent  in  the  Englislx  ser- 
vice, omits  several  of  its  really  objectionable  features,  brings  some  of 
the  offices  (the  communion,  for  example)  nearer  to  the  primitive 
pattern,  modifies  others  to  suit  our  peculiar  institutions,  and,  on  the 
whole,  is  a  noble  monument  to  the  wisdom,  prudence,  piety  and 
churchmanship  of  the  fathers  of  the  American  Church.  By  the  forty- 
fifth  cantn  of  1832,  it  is  required  that  every  minister  shall,  before  all 
sermons  and  lectures,  and  all  other  occasioiis  of  public  worship,  use 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  the  same  is  or  may  be  established  by 
the  authority  of  the  General  Convention  of  this  Church.  And  in  per- 
forming said  service,  no  other  prayers  shall  be  used  than  those  pre- 
scribed b  •  the  said  book. — Hook,  Church  Dictionary,  Am.  Ed. 

We  ask,  where  is  the  scriptural  authority  for  all  this 
priestly  jugglery  and  ecclesiastical  legislation?  There 
is  no  scriptural  authority,  and  the  creed-mongers  do  not 
pretend  to  give  any.  The  whole  question  rests  upon 
assumptions.  Why,  instead  of  working  over  three 
hundred  j-ears  to  bring  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
"in/0  conformily  zvith  the  ivrittcn  word  of  God."  did  they 
not  take  the  "written  word  of  God,"  and  stand  upon  it, 
and  sta\'  there  ?  Why  have  they  been  shuffling  around 
these  irsany  years  ?  If  it  is  reform  they  are  after,  and 
they  arc  truly  seeking  the  unity  of  God's  people,  and  if 
they  are  really  desirous  of  discovering  and  identifying 
the  Apostolic  Church,  why  not  accept  the  teaching  of 
inspired  apostles,  and  foHow  the  teaching  of  the  apos- 
tles, and  pattern  after  the  model  Church  as  established 
by  those  holy  men  of  God?  We  answer,  because  if 
they  were  to  do  so,  they  would  be  shorn  of  ecclcsiasti- 


RKFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


75 


cal  power;  bishops  could  no  longer  legislate  for  the 
"laity";  distinctive  titles  of  honor  would  have  to  be 
given  up;  bishops  could  not  live  sumptuously  every 
day,  and  there  would  be  a  heavy  decrease  in  their  sti- 
pends ;  they  could  no  longer  lord  it  over  God's  heritage, 
and  all  chances  for  clerical  and  prelatical  promotion 
would  be  cut  off  Liturgies,  and  '\Church  Standards," 
and  Confessions  of  Faith,  are  changed  from  time  to 
time,  so  as  to  be  adapted  to  the  people  and  to  the 
times.  This  is  worldly  wisdom,  but  not  the  wisdom 
that  comes  from  above.  These  ecclesiastical  vandals 
dare  not  change  the  Bible  to  suit  times  and  places,  and 
the  people ;  but  they  will  assume  to  create  a  creed,  and 
then  assume  to  change  it  with  the  changing  times. 
Did  Christ  and  his  apostles  leave  instructions  to  the 
effect  that  the  gospel  and  the  plan  of  salvation  should, 
in  successive  ages,  be  so  changed  as  to  harmonize  with 
every  form  of  society,  and  with  the  varying  form.s  of 
civil  government  ?  God  intended  that  the  truths  of  the 
Bible  and  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  should  educate  and 
mold  society  and  civil  governments,  and  not  that  eccle- 
siastics and  civil  governments  should  transform  the 
word  of  God  into  Creeds  and  Symbols  of  Faith.  Why 
not  as  well  undertake  to  change  the  immutable  laws  of 
nature  as  to  presume  to  alter  or  modify  the  constitu- 
tional laws  of  the  kingdom  of  God? 

What  kind  of  an  infallible  guide  is  that  to  the  human 
soul,  that  "omits  objectionable  features,"  and  modifier 
others  to  suit  our  "peculiar  instituti  ins, "  in  order  to 
bring  the  people  '  'nearer  to  the  primitive  pattern  "  f  Why 
not  take  the  "primitive  pattern"  itself,  and  lay  aside 
all  makeshifts  and  counterfeits  ?  Can  we  not  understand 
the  "primitive  pattern  " — God's  own  workmanship  -  far 


76 


THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 


easier  than  all  human  imitations?  Creeds  do  not  con- 
tain the  principles  of  reform,  much  less  the  light  and  the 
knowledge  that  lead  to  a  complete  restoration  of  apos- 
tolic Christianity.  If  men  are  wiser  and  better,  it  is 
because  their  love  of  God  and  their  love  of  Bible  truths 
has  made  them  so.  They  are  good  in  spite  of  their 
lifeless  creeds.  Creeds  have  not  revolutionized  the 
world,  and  set  up  the  right  and  torn  down  the  wrong, 
but  the  spirit  of  Christ  and  the  power  of  the  gospel 
have  done  it. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION 
OF  FAITH. 


We  now  come  to  speak  of  the  origin  of  the  Presbyte- 
rian Church  and  of  the  formation  of  the  Westminster 
Confession  of  Faith.  A  joint  resolution  of  the  houses 
of  the  EngHsh  Parliament,  without  the  sanction  of 
King  Charles  I  ,  was  passed  June  12,  1643,  which  con- 
voked a  Synod  "for  settling  the  government  and  liturgy 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  for  vindicating  and  clear- 
ing of  the  doctrine  of  said  Church  from  false  aspersions 
and  interpretations,"  and,  furthermore,  for  bringing 
about  a  more  perfect  reformation  of  the  Church  than 
was  obtained  under  Edward  VI.  and  Elizabeth,  by 
which  a  closer  union  of  sentiment  with  the  Church  of 
Scotland  and  the  Reformed  churches  of  the  Continent 
might  be  secured.  Parliament  appointed  to  member- 
ship in  this  Synod  one  hundred  and  twenty-one  clergy- 
men, taken  from  the  various  shires  of  England,  ten 
members  of  the  House  of  Lords,  and  twenty  members 
from  the  House  of  Commons.  The  General  Synod  of 
Scotland,  August  19,  1643,  elected  five  clergymen  and 
three  lay  elders  as  commissioners  to  the  Westminster 
Synod.  About  twenty  of  the  members  originally  sum- 
moned were  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
several  of  them  afterward  bishops ;  but  few  of  the  Epis- 
copal members  took  their  seats.  The  bishops  of  the 
English  Church  never  acknowledged  its  claims,  and  the 
King  condemned  its  sessions  under  extreme  penalties, 

(77) 


78     ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION  OF  FAITH. 

June  22,  1643.  The  Synod,  however,  contrary  to  the 
will  of  the  King,  convened  July  i,  1643,  in  Westminster 
Abbey  (hence  the  name,  Westminster  Confession  of 
Faith),  in  the  presence  of  both  houses  of  Parliament. 
The  average  attendance  of  clerical  members  during  the 
sessions  was  between  sixty  and  eighty.  The  great  body 
of  the  members,  both  clerical  and  lay,  were  Presbyte- 
rians ;  ten  or  twelve  were  Independents,  or,  as  now 
styled,  Congregationalists,  and  five  or  six  called  them- 
selves Erastians.  The  great  majority  were  Calvinistic 
in  faith. 

The  purposes  for  which  this  august  Assembly  of 
divines  was  convoked,  as  already  intimated,  were  to 
vindicate  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
to  recommend  such  further  reformation  of  her  discipline, 
liturgy  and  government  as  might  "be  agreeable  to 
God's  holy  word,  and  most  apt  to  procure  and  preserve 
the  peace  of  the  Church  at  home,  and  nearer  agree- 
ment with  the  Church  of  Scotland  and  other  Reformed 
churches  abroad."  But  the  Parliament,  feeling  their 
need  of  Scottish  aid,  acceded  to  the  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant,  and  urged  the  Scotch  to  send  their  deputies 
to  the  Assembly.  Its  objects  were  extended  ;  and,  in 
order  to  carry  out  the  covenanted  uniformity,  it  was 
empowered  to  prepare  a  new  Confession  of  Faith  and 
Catechism,  as  well  as  directories  for  public  worship  and 
church  government,  which  might  be  adopted  by  all  the 
Churches  represented.  The  Church  of  Scotland  threw 
all  its  influence  in  favor  of  strict  Calvinism  and  Presbyte- 
rianism.  Before  electing  delegates  to  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  in  compliance  with  the  request  of  Parliament, 
it  adopted,  August  17,  1643,  the  so-called  "Solemn 
League   and   Covenant,"  which    bound   the  Scottish 


KKFORMATORY  MOVLMENTS. 


79 


nation  to  the  defense  of  the  Reformed  reh'gion  in  Scot- 
land, tlie  furtherance  of  the  Reformation  in  England 
and  Ireland  in  doctrine,  worship,  church  organization 
and  discipline ;  the  establishing  of  ecclesiastical  and 
religious  uniformit}'  in  the  three  realms ;  the  extirpation 
of  papacy  and  prelacy,  of  heresy  and  all  ungodliness ; 
and  the  support  of  all  the  rights  of  Parliament  and  of 
the  rightful  authority  of  the  King.  This  document  was 
immediately  transmitted  to  Parliament,  and  thence  to 
tlie  Westminster  Assembly,  and  was  formally  endorsed 
by  each  of  these  bodies,  but  was  condemned  by  the 
King.  The  Assembly  sought  to  gain  the  fraternal  sym- 
pathies of  the  Reformed  churches  on  the  Continent  also, 
and  to  that  end  addressed  to  them  circular  letters,  which 
elicited  more  or  less  favorable  responses,  and  which  the 
King  endeavored  to  neutralize  by  issuing  a  manifesto  in 
Latin  and  English,  in  which  he  denied  the  intention 
charged  upon  him  of  re-establishing  the  Papal  power  in 
his  realm.  The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  binding 
the  ecclesiastical  bodies  of  the  two  nations  into  a  union, 
had  been  passed  in  Scotland  August  17,  was  subse- 
quently accepted  by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and 
ordered  by  the  English  Parliament  to  be  printed,  Sep- 
tember 21,  and  subscribed  September  25,  when  the 
House  of  Commons,  with  the  Scottish  commissioners 
and  the  Westminster  Assembly,  met  in  the  Church  of 
St.  Margaret,  Westminster.  The  House  of  Lords  took 
the  "Covenant,"  October  15. 

"The  question  of  church  government  occasioned  the 
most  difficulty,  and  seemed  for  a  time  impossible  to  be 
settled.  Many  of  the  most  learned  divines  who  were 
entirely  on  the  side  of  the  Parliament  were  yet  in  favor 
of  what  they  termed  primitive  episcopacy,  or  the  system 


80    ORIGIN  OF  THI-:  Wr.STMIXSTEK  CONFESSION'  OF  FAITH. 

in  which  the  presbyters  and  their  president  governed- 
the  churches  in  common.  Then  there  were  the  Scottish 
commissioners  and  the  more  radical  Puritans,  who  were 
at  the  opposite  extreme;  and,  in  order  to  reach  a  con- 
clusion, these  differences  must  be  reconciled.  It  waS' 
accomplished  after  much  discussion  and  long  delay,  by 
the  adoption  of  the  Presbyterian  form  of  government." 

A  committee,  consisting  of  about  twenty-five  mem- 
bers, was  appointed  by  the  Assembly  "to  prepare 
matter  for  a  joint  Confession  of  Faith,"  about  Aug'ust 
20,  1644.  The  matter  was  prepared,  in  part,  at  least, 
by  this  committee,  and  the  digesting  of  it  into  a  formal 
draft  was  intrusted  to  a  smaller  committee  on  May 
12,  1645.  The  debating  of  the  separate  articles  begaa 
July  7,  1645,  and  the  following  day  a  committee  of  three 
(afterward  increased  to  five)  was  appointed  to  "take' 
care  of  the  wording  of  the  Confession,"  as  the  articles 
should  be  adopted  in  the  Assembly.  On  July  16,  the 
committee  reported  the  heads  of  the  Confession,  and 
these  were  distributed  to  the  three  large  committees  tO' 
be  elaborated  and  prepared  for  discussion.  All  were 
repeatedly  read  and  debated  in  the  most  thorough  man- 
ner possible  in  the  Assembly.  On  September  25,  1646, 
a  part  of  the  Confession  was  finally  passed,  and  on 
December  4  the  remainder  received  the  sanction  of  the 
Assembly,  when  the  entire  document  w  is  jjresentcd  to 
the  Parliament.  That  body  ordered  the  printing  of  six- 
hundred  copies  for  the  use  of  members  of  Parliament 
and  of  the  Assembly,  and  that  Scripture  proofs  should 
be  added  to  the  Confession,  wiiich  was  accordingly 
done.  In  1647  the  Confession  was  approved  by  the 
Church  of  Scotland  in  the  form  in  which  it  passed  the 
Assembly,  and  it  was  afterward  ratified  by  th.e  ScotcU. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Si 


Parliament.  It  was  passed  by  the  English  Parliament 
in  1648,  under  the  title  of  Articles  of  Christian  Religion, 
but  with  certain  changes.  The  basis  of  the  Confession, 
says  the  historian,  is  doubtless  those  Calvinistic  articles 
which  are  supposed  to  have  been  prepared  by  Usher, 
and  in  161 5  were  adopted  by  the  Convocation  of  the 
Irish  Church.  In  the  formation  of  this  Presbyterian 
"Symbol"  the  Assembly  at  first  undertook  to  revise 
the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the  Anglican  Church,  and 
proceeded  with  that  work  until  fifteen  articles  had  been 
revamped  with  elements  of  a  more  pronounced  Calvin- 
istic character  and  provided  with  Scripture  proofs.  The 
only  important  change  made  in  this  process  was  the 
omission  of  Article  VIII.,  concerning  the  authority  of 
the  three  ecumenical  symbols.  The  intention  of  the 
Synod  was  to  ground  every  statement  directly  on  Scrip- 
ture as  the  only  rule  of  faith,  while  the  Church  of 
England,  under  Edward  VI.  and  Elizabeth,  conceded  to 
Catholic  tradition,  "if  not  in  conflict  with  Scripture,  a 
regulative  authority."  The  Scottish  delegates,  how- 
ever, induced  the  Assembly  to  undertake  the  formation 
of  an  entirely  "new  Symbol." 

The  Confession,  under  the  title  of  "The  Hutnble  Ad- 
vice of  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  now  by  Authority  of 
Parliament  Sitting  at  Westminster,  Concerning  a  Confession 
of  Faith,''  etc.,  was  printed  in  London  in  December, 
1646,  without  proofs,  and  in  May,  1647,  with  proofs, 
for  the  use  of  the  houses  of  Parliament  and  the  Assem- 
bly. A  copy  of  this  last  edition  was  taken  to  Scotland 
by  the  commissioners,  and  from  it  three  hundred  copies 
were  printed  for  the  use  of  the  General  Assembly 
there.  After  being  approved  by  that  body,  it  was 
published  in  Scotland  with  the  title  of  ''The  Confession 

7 


82    ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION  OF  FAITH. 

of  Faith  Agreed  upon  by  the  Assembly  of  Divines,''  etc., 
and  while  the  House  of  Commons  were  still  considering 
it,  a  London  bookseller  brought  it  out  under  the  same 
title  in  1648.  In  the  same  year  it  was,  with  the  omis- 
sion of  parts  of  certain  chapters,  and  with  some  minute 
verbal  alterations,  approved  by  the  two  houses,  and 
published  under  the  title,  Articles  of  Christian  Religion, 
Approved  ajtd  Passed  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  after 
Advice  had  with  the  Assembly  of  Divines.''  But  the 
latter  form  is  not  common,  and  the  Confession  continues 
to  be  printed  in  the  form  in  which  it  was  drawn  by  the 
Assembly  and  approved  by  the  Church  of  Scotland. 
The  last  of  the  Scotch  commissioners  left  the  Assembly 
November  9,  1647.  On  February  22,  1649,  after  the 
A.ssembly  had  held  eleven  hundred  and  sixty-three  sit- 
tings, lasting  each  from  9  a.  m.  to  2  p.  m.,  the  Parliament, 
by  an  ordinance,  changed  what  remained  of  the  Assem- 
bly into  a  committee  for  trying  and  examining  ministers, 
and  in  this  form  it  continued  to  hold  weekly  sittings 
until  the  dissolution  of  the  "Long  Parliament,"  April 
20,  1653.  The  Larger  Catechism  was  sent  to  the  House 
of  Commons  October  22,  1647;  the  Shorter  Catechism, 
November  25,  the  same  year.  In  the  autumn  of  1648 
both  houses  of  Parliament  ordered  the  printing  and 
publishing  of  the  Shorter  Catechism,  but  the  House  of 
Lords  was  discontinued  before  it  had  acted  on  the 
Larger  Catechism. 

And  thus,  in  the  midst  of  such  politico-ecclesiastical 
throes  as  we  have  described,  the  Westminster  Confession 
of  Faith  was  born  into  the  world.  We  have  seen  that 
the  civil  powers  had  as  much  to  do  in  the  manufacture 
of  this  abstruse,  recondite,  metaphysical  document  as 
the  Church  "divines."    It  is  the  creation  of  statecraft 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


83 


and  priestcraft.  It  is  a  compromise  between  Romanism 
and  Episcopacy  —  a  sort  of  hybrid,  begotten  of  the 
Papacy  and  born  of  Protestantism.  Facts  go  to  show 
that  Episcopacy  and  Presbyterianism,  as  well  as  Roman- 
ism, would  now,  as  then,  make  civil  government  sub- 
servient to  the  ecclesiastical  authorities.  It  is  but  just 
to  say  that  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  Reformers 
of  the  sixteenth  century  the  Papacy  received  a  fatal 
blow.  But  let  it  be  understood  that  it  was  not  the 
formulation  and  publication  of  Confessions  of  Faith, 
nor  the  influence  of  the  abstract  propositions  they 
contained,  that  paralyzed  the  arm  of  the  Pope,  and  that 
gave  impulse  to  the  reformatory  movements  of  that 
eventful  age.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  the  translation 
of  the  Scriptures  into  the  language  of  the  common 
people,  and  the  faithful  proclannation  of  God's  word, 
that  effectually  and  fatally  weakened  the  despotism  of 
Rome.  It  was  Luther  and  Zwingle,  exposing  the  rot- 
tenness of  the  priesthood  of  Rome,  and  Calvin,  by  the 
word  of  God,  striking  at  the  false  theology  of  Romish 
prelates,  and  Knox,  by  the  same  word  of  God,  before 
creeds  took  on  form,  demolishing  the  governmental 
usurpations  of  the  Papal  See,  that,  combined  and 
fo-operating,  wrought  the  mighty  work,  the  impulse  of 
which  revolution  still  moves  among  modern  reformers. 
As  a  Bible  people,  we  accept  the  Bible  principles  of 
»eform,  as  advocated  and  applied  by  the  reformers  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  but  we  reject  their  creeds  in  toto, 
as  bemg  the  product  of  fallible  and  uninspired  men,  and 
as  being  the  prolific  and  chief  source  of  sectarianism 
and  a  divided  Church,  with  all  their  concomitants  of 
sectarian  rivalry,  sectarian  bigotry  and  sectarian  pride. 
We  have  our  mission,  and  we  know  our  mission. 


84    ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION  OF  FAITH, 

which  is  the  repudiation  of  all  Symbols  of  Faith,  all 
Church  Standards,  and  all  bodies  that  presume  to  legis- 
late for  the  Church  in  the  stead  of  Christ,  while  at  the 
same  time  we  shall  elevate  the  Bible  above  all  the  works 
of  men,  and  persistently  plead  for  complete  restoration 
of  apostolic  teaching  and  practice. 


ORIGIN  OF  CONGREGATIONALISM. 


We  now  come  to  the  origin  and  development  of  Con- 
gregationalism, which  forms  an  integral  and  interesting 
chapter  in  reformatory  movements.  As  contrasted  with 
Romanism  and  Episcopacy,  and  as  contrasted  also  with 
Presbyterianism,  we  shall  find  Congregationalism,  as  a 
system  of  "church  polity,"  far  in  advance  of  those 
ecclesiastical  systems,  but,  in  some  features,  as  falling 
short  of  the  apostolic  order  of  things.  We  are  free  to 
admit  that  Congregationalism  makes  a  nearer  approach 
to  the  primitive  order  than  any  of  the  "Orthodox 
Churches."  They  claim  that  their  system  is  only  a 
substantial  return  to  the  order  and  practice  of  the 
apostolic  churches,  which  had  been  corrupted  by  the 
tendencies  that  culminated  in  the  Papacy;  and  that 
traces  of  dissent  from  the  episcopal  power  are  found  in 
every  age.  (See  Punchard's  History  of  Congregational- 
ism.^ The  origin  of  modern  Congregationalism  may  be 
traced  to  the  early  developments  of  the  Reformation  in 
England,  an  account  of  which  we  have  already  given. 
From  the  beginning  of  the  protest  against  Romanism, 
some  of  the  principal  distinctive  opinions,  afterward 
developed  into  Congregational  polity,  especially  the 
identity  of  "bishop"  and  "presbyter,"  and  notably  the 
independent  right  of  each  congregation  to  choose  its 
own  "pastor"  and  exercise  discipline,  without  the 
interposition  of  council  or  bishop,  found  decided  advo- 
cates and  unflinching  adherents.  While  Henry  VIII., 
.after  repudiating  the  Romish  supremacy,  which  we  have 

(85) 


86 


ORIGIN  OF  CONGRKGATIONALISM. 


already  noted,  adhered  to  the  essential  features  of 
Romish  theology,  and  in  part  to  Papal  polity  and  prac- 
tice, the  advancement  of  enlightened  reason  continued 
in  the  opposite  direction.  When  the  reforms  conducted 
by  Edward  VI.,  already  noted  in  previous  chapters  of 
this  series,  were  peremptorily  brought  to  a  standstill  by 
Mary,  Queen  of  Scotland,  dissenting  congregations,  the 
forecast  substantially  of  modern  Congregationalism, 
came  immediately,  though  privately,  into  existence  in 
various  places,  as,  for  instance,  in  London  in  1555. 
Their  existence  is  learned  almost  entirely  from  persecu- 
tions to  which  their  members  were  subjected,  but  of 
which  few  particulars  are  preserved  in  history. 

Among  the  Congregational  martyrs  were  Barrowe, 
Greenwood  and  Penry,  executed  in  1593.  Of  the  Con- 
gregational Church  formed  in  London  in  1592,  of  which 
Francis  Johnson  was  "pastor,"  and  John  Greenwood 
"teacher,"  fifty-six  members  were  seized  and  impris- 
oned. Many  of  them  eventually  found  their  way  to 
Amsterdam,  where  they  reorganized  under  the  same 
pastor.  Robert  Brown's  publication,  in  1582,  of  "A 
Book  which  showeth  the  Life  and  Manners  of  all  true 
Christians,"  etc.,  presents  the  earliest  full  development 
of  the  Independent  side  of  Congregationalism.  While 
at  first  only  Puritans,  many  became  Separatists,  in 
despair  of  securing  complete  reformation  in  the  Church 
of  England.  About  the  year  1602  a  congregation  was 
organized  in  Gainesborough  in  Lincolnshire,  Rev.  John 
Smyth  pastor.  In  1606  another  congregation  was 
formed  at  Scrooby,  Nottinghamshire,  Richard  Clyton 
pastor,  which  met  at  the  house  of  William  Brewster. 
Of  that  congregation  John  Robinson  was  a  member, 
and  afterward  associate  pastor.    In  1606  Mr.  Smyth 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


87 


and  his  friends  removed  to  Amsterdam.  In  the  follow- 
ing year  Mr.  Clyton  and  many  of  his  church-members, 
after  enduring  great  persecution,  also  escaped  to 
Amsterdam,  and  in  1608  the  majority  of  the  remaining 
members  of  the  Scrooby  congregation  followed.  After 
the  lapse  of  about  a  year  the  church  removed  to  Leyden. 
But  owing  to  the  disadvantage  of  residing  in  a  country 
of  different  language  and  customs  from  their  own,  they 
resolved  to  emigrate  to  America,  and  consequently  a 
portion  of  the  Leyden  Church,  with  Elder  William 
Brewster,  after  many  tedious  trials,  landed  at  Plymouth, 
Massachusetts,  Dec.  21,  1620  (N.  S.),  while  Robinson, 
with  a  portion  of  the  congregation,  remained  at  Leyden. 
In  1616  a  Congregational  church  was  established  at 
Southwark,  London,  under  the  care  of  Henry  Jacob, 
who  had  been  confirmed  in  Congregational  principles 
by  conference  with  John  Robinson  at  Leyden.  This 
congregation,  organized  after  Mr.  Jacob  had  conferred 
with  leading  Puritans,  probably  gathered  together  some 
of  the  scattered  members  of  Mr.  Johnson's  congregation. 

Though  sometimes  called  "the  first  Independent 
Church  in  England,"  there  had  been  in  existence  secret 
organizations  in  the  reign  of  Mary,  and  the  congrega- 
tions of  Gainesborough  and  Scrooby,  and,  it  is  said, 
one  at  Duckenfield,  Cheshire  County.  About  1624 
Rev.  John  Lathrop  became  pastor  of  the  Southwark  con- 
gregation. In  1632  he  was  imprisoned,  with  forty  others 
of  its  members.  In  1634  Mr.  Lathrop,  having  been 
released,  removed  to  America,  with  about  thirty  of  his 
flock,  and  in  that  year  organized  the  congregation  in 
Scituate,  Massachusetts,  where  he  continued  till  1639, 
when  the  majority  removed  to  West  Barnstable,  where 
that  congregation  is  still  existing. 


AMERICAN  CONGREGATIONALISM. 


The  history  of  the  American  Congregationalists  is 
pretty  well  known.  The  Plymouth  settlement  was  dis- 
tinct in  origin  and  government  from  that  of  Massachu- 
setts Bay,  the  Pilgrim  settlers  being  distinctively  known 
as  the  "Pilgrims."  The  persecutions  under  Laud,  in 
the  Old  Country,  drove  many  Puritans  into  the  resolu- 
tion to  emigrate.  Endicott  and  his  companions  began 
the  colony  at  Salem,  Mass.,  in  1628,  and  in  1630  John 
Winthrop,  their  governor,  with  other  emigrants,  occu- 
pied Boston  and  the  surrounding  towns.  Settlements 
were  made  at  Hartford  and  Saybrook,  in  Connecticut, 
in  1635,  in  1638   Davenport  and  his  associates 

founded  the  New  Haven  colony,  while  in  1633  a  distinct 
company  reinforced  the  colonies  on  the  Piscataqua 
River.  The  Plymouth  congregation  had  come  out  fully 
organized ;  in  the  other  settlements  congregations  were 
immediately  formed.  None  except  the  Plymouth 
people  had  come  to  America  as  Separatists ;  the  others 
declared  that  they  did  not  separate  from  the  Church  of 
England,  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  they  only  desired 
to  expurgate  its  corruptions.  But,  having  colonized  in 
a  strange  and  far-away  country,  removed  from  all  eccle- 
siastical establishments,  and  searching  the  Scriptures  as 
the  basis  of  their  ecclesiastical  order,  they  all  adopted 
the  Congregational  Church  polity.  Most  of  their  min- 
isters had  been  regularly  ordained  in  the  Church  of 
England,  and,  as  is  well  known,  were  a  highly  educated 

(88) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


89 


class  of  men,  as  {e.  g.)  Cotton  and  Wilson,  of  Boston  ; 
Mather,  of  Dorchester ;  Hooker  and  Stone,  of  Hart- 
ford ;  Davenport  and  Hooke,  of  New  Haven. 

American  Congregationahsm  proper  received  its  relig- 
ious form,  essentially,  in  the  early  religious  history  of 
New  England.  If  traced  to  the  writings  of  any  one 
person,  it  would  be  to  those  of  John  Robinson,  of  Ley- 
den  ;  those  of  John  Cotton  and  Thomas  Hooker,  in 
America,  being  next  in  importance.  Robert  Brown 
was  never  acknowledged  as  a  leader,  he  being  a  strict 
and  severe  Independent,  and,  finally,  returning  to  the 
communion  of  the  Church  of  England  ;  but,  at  the  same 
time,  it  is  conceded  that  his  writings  did  undoubtedly 
incite  many  minds  to  examine  and  reject  the  claims  of 
Episcopacy.  The  system  can  not,  however,  be  satis- 
factorily traced  to  any  one  man,  but  rather  to  the  united 
sentiment  of  the  early  emigrants,  who  agreed  in  carrying 
into  practice  the  opinion  that  every  congregation  is, 
according  to  the  Scriptures,  confined  to  the  limits  of  a 
single  or  individual  congregation,  and  that  it  must  be 
democratic  in  government ;  while,  at  the  same  time,  all 
congregations  are  regarded  as  in  fellowship  with  one 
another.  Hence  the  term  "the  Congregational  Church" 
is  never  used  to  denote  the  denomination,  but  "the 
•Congregational  churches." 

Congregationalists  are  generally  Calvinistic  in  the- 
ology, although  in  the  United  States  there  is  an 
advanced  party  who  repudiate  distinctive  Calvinism. 
Congregationalists,  as  a  class,  hold  to  a  system  of  church 
government  which  embraces  these  two  fundamental 
principles,  viz.:  (i)  that  every  local  congregation  of 
believers,  united  for  worship,  and  for  observing  the 
"sacraments,"  and  for  the  enforcement  of  discipline,  is 


GO 


AMERICAN  CONGREGATIONALISM. 


a  complete  church  within  itself,  and  can  not  be  subjected 
in  governmental  affairs  to  any  ecclesiastical  authority 
outside  of  itself;  and  (2)  that  all  such  local  congrega- 
tions are  in  communion  with  one  another,  and  are  under 
moral  obligations  to  fulfill  all  the  duties  involved  in  such 
fellowship.  The  system  is  distinguished  from  Presby- 
terianism  by  the  first,  and  from  Independency  by  the 
second.  It  involves  the  equal  right  of  all  the  members 
to  vote  in  all  governmental  affairs ;  and  the  parity  of  all 
ministers,  the  ministers  being  set  apart  by  the  congre- 
gations, and  who,  as  ministers,  are  not  invested  with 
any  power  of  government,  but  who  have  official  power 
only  in  the  congregations  by  which  they  may  be  cho-sen 
pastors.  It  is  seen  that  in  regard  to  the  independency 
(autonomy)  of  the  congregations,  the  Congregationalists 
occupy  nearly  the  same  position  as  that  which  is  held 
by  the  Disciples  of  Christ,  or  by  those  people  who  have 
in  reality  identified  the  Church  of  Christ  as  established 
by  the  apostles.  But  the  Congregationalists  are  not 
only  wrong  in  name,  viewed  from  the  angle  of  apostolic 
teaching,  but  they  are  wrong  in  doctrine,  which  is  made 
clear  by  the  fact  that  they  have,  in  common  with  all 
pedobaptists,  substituted  affusion  and  rantism  for  im- 
mersion, and  practice  infant  baptism,  in  respect  to  which 
practices  they  are  not  a  whit  in  advance  of  the  Romish 
Church,  from  which  these  violations  of  the  law  of  God 
have  descended.  They  are  right  in  discarding  councils, 
.synods,  conferences  and  presbyteries,  and  right  in  deny- 
ing all  ecclesiastical  authority  beyond  the  individual 
congregation,  but  they  are  decidedly  wrong  in  changing 
the  ordinances  of  Jesus  Christ.  As  means  of  regenera- 
tion, they  are  right  in  denying  the  alleged  spiritual 
influence  of  dreams,  and  visions,   and  psychological 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


impressions,  and  all  hallucinations  of  the  imagination, 
but  as  an  exponent  of  the  true  Apostolic  Church,  in  all 
the  constituent  elements  of  the  one  body,  the  Congre- 
gational Church  is  materially  defective.  It  is  not  built 
exclusively  upon  the  basis  of  God's  Word,  and  hence 
never  can  form  the  nucleus  of  Christian  unity,  because, 
if  a  system  is  found  to  be  defective  in  one  or  more 
parts,  it  must  be  rejected  as  a  whole.  A  system  of 
things  which  presumes  to  represent  the  divine  model, 
And  at  the  same  time  incorporates  tradition  and  false 
dogmas,  professedly  on  the  principle  of  human  expedi- 
ency, and  with  a  view  of  conciliating  the  captious  and 
unregenerated  world,  can  never  hope  to  restore,  unim- 
paired, the  apostolic  order  of  things. 

Hence  the  necessity  of  the  existence  of  the  people 
known  as  the  Disciples  of  Christ,  who,  repudiating  all 
ecclesiastical  authority  outside  of  the  government  of 
Christ,  and  who,  rejecting  all  the  creeds  and  dogmas  of 
contradictory  and  self-consuming  sects,  plant  themselves 
exclusively  upon  the  inspired  Scriptures,  as  their  only 
reliable  and  infallible  guide,  and  as  their  only  rule  of 
faith  and  practice.  Their  tocsin  of  war  is  the  avowed 
destruction  of  all  sectism,  and  the  motto  of  the  banner 
they  bear  is  "one  Lord,  one  Faith  and  one  Baptism." 
They  regard  the  divisions  of  Christendom  as  a  positive 
sin,  and  also  as  the  prolific  source  of  infidelity.  They 
assume  that  "the  unity  of  the  Spirit"  can  only  secure 
"the  bond  of  peace" — a  permanent  and  lasting  peace — 
by  an  appeal  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  the  only  source 
of  information  and  authority.  They  constantly  keep 
before  their  eyes  the  last  intercessory  prayer  of  our 
Lord:  "Neither  pray  I  for  these  alone  [the  apostles]; 
but  for  them  also  who  shall  believe  on  me  through  their 


92 


AMERICAN  CONGREGATIONALISM. 


word:  that  they  all  may  be  one,  as  thou,  Father,  art  in 
me,  and  I  in  thee;  that  they  also  maybe  one  in  us; 
that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me." 
We  hold  that  sinners  can  only  be  saved,  and  church 
unity  accomplished,  through  the  words  of  the  apostles. 
For  Christ  said  to  the  apostles:  "Whoever  hears  you, 
hears  me  ;  and  whoever  hears  me,  hears  him  who  sent 
me."  And  to  the  Corinthians  (2  Cor.  v.  20)  Paul  writes: 
"Now  then,  we  are  ambassadors  for  Chiist,  as  though 
God  did  beseech  you  by  us;  we  pray  you  in  Christ's 
stead,  be  you  reconciled  to  God. "  Paul  said  to  Timothy, 
^'Preach  t)u  Word,''  which  excludes  the  preaching  of 
dogmas,  theories,  opinions,  church  polities,  huma« 
creeds  and  "Church  Standards." 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 


The  origin  of  the  Baptist  Church  is  confessedly 
obscure.  It  is  a  difficult  and  involved  history  to  trace. 
The  Baptist  Church,  distinctively,  can  not  be  traced 
beyond  the  sixteenth  century.  It  is  purely  a  creation 
of  circumstances.  Its  incipient  developments  are  found 
in  the  religious  chaos  of  the  sixteenth  century.  In  the 
midst  of  all  the  diversities  of  opinion  that  existed  in 
the  Reformation  of  that  eventful  period,  it  was  con- 
stantly maintained  by  Protestants  that  "  Holy  Scripture 
containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,  so  that 
whatsoever  is  neither  read  therein  nor  may  be  proved 
thereby,  although  it  be  some  time  received  of  the  faith- 
ful as  godly  and  profitable  for  an  order  and  comeliness, 
yet  no  man  ought  to  be  constrained  to  believe  it  as  an 
article  of  faith  or  repute  it  requisite  to  the  necessity  of 
salvation."  (Articles  of  King  Edward  VI.)  The  oper- 
ation of  this  broad  principle  of  toleration  and  private 
judgment  was  denied  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  and, 
consequently,  those  who  adopted  this  principle,  mani- 
festly so  fair  and  equitable,  suffered  the  anathemas  of 
the  Papal  powers.  Each  separate  body  of  Protestants 
claimed  the  privilege  of  standing  on  the  basis  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  was  prepared  to  resist  alike  the  tyranny 
of  Rome  and  what  it  considered  the  license  of  other 
Protestant  sects.  Thus  it  came  to  pass  that  the  Bap- 
tists, or,  as  their  opponents  called  them,  the  Anabaptists 
(or,  as  Zwingle  names  them,  Catabaptists),  were  stren- 

(93) 


94 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 


uously  opposed  by  all  other  sects  of  Protestantism,  and 
it  was  regarded  by  nearly  all  the  early  reformers  to  be 
the  duty  of  the  civil  magistrates  to  punish  them  with 
fine  and  imprisonment,  and  even  with  death,  as  an 
abundance  of  historical  documents  attest.  A  writer  in 
the  Encyclopizdia  Britannica  says :  ' '  There  was,  no 
doubt,  some  justification  for  this  severity  in  the  fact 
that  the  fanaticism  which  burst  forth  in  the  early  times 
of  the  Reformation  frequently  led  to  insurrection  and 
revolt,  and  in  particular  that  the  leader  of  the  '  peasant 
war'  in  Saxony,  Thomas  Miinzer,  and  probably  many 
of  his  followers,  were  Anabaptists.  One  result  of  this 
severity  is,  that  the  records  of  the  early  history  of  the 
Anabaptists,  both  on  the  Continent  and  in  this  country 
(England),  are  very  few  and  meagre.  Almost  all  that  is 
currently  known  of  them  comes  to  us  from  their  oppo- 
nents. " 

There  is,  however,  much  valuable  information,  together 
with  detailed  accounts  of  their  sufferings,  in  the  Dutch 
Martyrology  of  Van  Braght,  himself  a  Baptist,  which 
bears  the  title  Martalaers  Spiegel  der  Doopsgesinde 
(2d  ed.  fol.,  1685),  an  English  translation  of  the  latter 
half  of  which  was  published  in  two  volumes,  8vo, 
London,  1850-53,  edited  by  Dr.  Underbill,  now  Secre- 
tary of  the  Baptist  Missionary  Society.  Probably  the 
earliest  Confession  of  Faith  of  any  Baptist  community 
is  that  given  by  Zwingle  in  the  second  part  of  his 
Elenchus  contra  Catabaptistas,  published  in  1527.  Zwingle 
professes  to  give  it  entire,  translating  it,  as  he  says,  ad 
verbunt  into  Latin.  He  upbraids  his  opponents  with 
not  having  published  these  articles,  but  declares  that 
there  is  scarcely  any  one  of  them  that  has  not  a  written 
idesctiptunt)  copy  of  these  laws  which  have  been  so  well 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


95 


concealed.  The  articles  are  in  all  seven.  The  first, 
which  we  give  in  full,  relates  to  baptism  : 

Baptism  ought  to  be  given  to  all  who  have  been  taught  repentance 
and  change  of  life,  and  who  in  truth  believe  that  through  Christ 
tbeir  sins  are  blotted  out  {abolila),  and  the  sins  of  all  who  are  willing 
(volunt)  to  walk  in  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  who  are  willing 
to  be  buried  with  him  into  death  (not  very  good  Baptist  doctrine  in 
the  present  age)  that  they  may  rise  again  with  him.  To  all,  therefore, 
who  in  this  manner  seek  baptism,  and  of  themselves  ask  us,  we  will 
give  it.  By  this  rule  are  excluded  all  baptism  of  infants,  the  great 
abomination  of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  For  this  article  we  have  the  testi- 
mony and  strength  of  Scripture,  we  have  also  the  practice  of  the 
apostles ;  which  things  we  simply  and  also  steadfastly  will  observe,  for 
we  are  assured  of  them. 

The  second  article,  we  are  told  by  the  same  writer, 
relates  to  withdravvment  {abs(entio)  or  excommunication, 
and  declares  that  all  who  have  given  themselves  to  the 
Lord  and  have  been  baptized  into  the  one  body  of  Christ 
should,  if  they  lapse  into  sin,  be  excommunicated. 
(The  Baptists  of  the  present  day  baptize  into  the  Bap- 
tist Church,  not  "into  the  one  body  of  Christ,"  as  the 
Disciples  of  Christ  teach.)  The  third  article  relates  to 
the  breaking  of  bread ;  in  this  it  is  declared  that  they 
who  break  the  one  bread  in  commemoration  of  the 
broken  body  of  Christ,  and  drink  of  the  one  cup  in 
commemoration  of  his  blood  poured  out,  must  first  be 
united  together  into  the  one  body  of  Christ,  that  is,  into 
the  Church  of  God — which  is  not  the  Baptist  Church  of 
the  present  day.  The  fourth  article  asserts  the  duty  of 
separation  from  the  world  and  its  abominations,  among 
which  are  included  all  papistical  and  semi-papistical 
works.  The  fifth  relates  to  pastors  of  the  congregation. 
They  assert  that  the  pastor  should  be  some  one  of  the 
flock  who  has  a  good  report  from  those  who  are  with- 
out.    "  His  office  is  to  read,  admonish,  teach,  learn, 


96  ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 

exhort,  correct,  or  excommunicate  in  the  church,  and  to 
preside  well  over  all  the  brethren  and  sisters,  both  in 
prayer  and  in  the  breaking  of  bread ;  and  in  all  things 
that  relate  to  the  body  of  Christ,  to  watch  that  it  may 
be  established  and  increased  so  that  the  name  of  God 
may  by  us  be  glorified  and  praised,  and  that  the  mouth 
of  blasphemers  may  be  stopped."  The  sixth  article 
relates  to  the  power  of  the  sword.  "The  sword,"  they 
say,  "  is  the  ordinance  of  God  outside  the  perfection  of 
Christ,  by  which  the  bad  is  punished  and  slain,  and  the 
good  is  defended."  They  further  declare  that  a  Chris- 
tian ought  not  to  decide  or  give  sentence  in  secular 
matters,  and  that  he  ought  not  to  exercise  the  office  of 
magistrate.  The  seventh  article  relates  to  oaths,  which 
they  declare  are  forbidden  of  Christ. 

It  is  here  proper  to  state,  for  the  benefit  of  the  general 
reader,  that  the  name  "  Anabaptist  "  means  one  baptism 
upon  another  baptism,  or  the  immersion  of  those  who 
have  been  sprinkled.  There  is  no  doubt  of  the  fact  that 
the  Anabaptists  suffered  terrible  persecution,  and  that 
all  sorts  of  epithets  of  abuse  and  calumny  were  heaped 
upon  their  devoted  heads.  Zwingle  styles  them  as 
"fanatical,  stolid,  audacious,  impious."  To  us,  at  the 
present  day,  who  enjoy  personal  liberty  and  religious 
toleration,  it  appears  as  shocking  as  it  is  wonderful, 
that  the  Protestant  Council  of  Zurich,  which  had  with 
great  difficulty  won  its  own  liberty,  should  pass  a 
decree,  as  Zwingle  himself  reports,  that  any  person  who 
administers  anabaptism  should  be  drowned  ;  and  still 
more  shocking  that,  at  the  time  when  Zwingle  wrote, 
this  cruel  decree  should  have  been  carried  into  effect 
against  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Anabaptists,  Felix 
Mantz,  who  himself  had  been  associated  with  Zwingle, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


not  only  as  a  student,  but  also  at  the  beginning  Ot  the 
Reformation.  In  this  base  and  contemptible  persecu- 
tion, the  Reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century  have  very 
little  to  be  proud  of,  and  such  persecution  on  the  part 
of  the  Reformers  only  goes  to  show  that  the  blight  of 
Romanism  still  clung  to  them,  as  it  still  does  to  their 
descendants  of  the  present  day.  In  1537  Menno 
Simonis  united  with  the  Anabaptists  and  soon  distin- 
guished himself  as  their  acknowledged  leader.  His 
moderation  and  piety,  according  to  Mosheim,  held  in 
check  the  turbulent  spirit  of  the  more  fanatical  among 
them.  He  died  in  1561,  after  a  life  passed  amid  contin- 
ual dangers  and  conflicts.  His  name  remains  as  the 
ecclesiastical  designation  of  the  Mennonites,  who  even- 
tually settled  in  the  Netherlands  under  the  protection  of 
William  the  Silent,  Prince  of  Orange,  many  of  them 
emigrating  to  the  United  States,  and  settling  in  the 
Middle  and  Western  States,  where  their  descendants 
have  been  largely  absorbed  by  the  various  denomina- 
tions, though  some  remain  in  separate  bands,  here  and 
there,  who  have  become  wholly  indifferent  to  immer- 
sion. 

The  Encyclopedia  Britannica  says  that  ' '  of  the  intro- 
duction of  Baptist  views  into  England  we  have  no 
certain  knowledge."  Fox  relates  "that  the  registers 
of  London  make  mention  of  certain  Dutchmen  counted 
for  Anabaptists,  of  whom  ten  were  put  to  death  in  sun- 
dry places  in  the  realm,  anno  1535  ;  the  other  ten 
repented  and  were  sav&d."  In  1536  Henry  VIII.,  as 
"in  earth  supreme  head  of  the  Church  of  England," 
issued  a  proclamation  together  with  articles  concerning 
faith  agreed  upon  by  Corivocation,  in  which  the  clergy 
are  told  to  instruct  the  people  thit  they  ought  to  repute 
8 


98 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 


and  take  "the  Anabaptists'  opinions  for  detestable  her- 
esies and  to  be  utterly  condemned."  The  document  is 
given  in  extenso  by  Fuller,  who  further  tells  us  from 
Stow's  Chronicles  that,  in  the  year  1538,  "four  Anabap- 
tists, three  men  and  one  woman,  all  Dutch,  bare  fagots 
at  Paul's  Cross,  and  three  days  after  a  man  and  woman 
of  their  sect  were  burnt  in  Smithfield. "  The  Anabap- 
tists united  in  communities  separate  from  the  Established 
Church.  Latimer,  in  1552,  speaks  of  them  as  segrega- 
ting themselves  from  the  company  of  other  men.  We 
have  not  space  to  follow  the  history  of  the  persecutions 
which  the  Anabaptists  endured  in  England  for  opinion's 
sake.  About  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century 
the  severe  laws  against  the  Puritans  led  many  dissenters 
to  emigrate  to  Holland.  Some  of  these  were  Baptists, 
and  an  English  Baptist  church  was  formed  in  Amster- 
dam about  the  year  1609.  -f"  '  ^^'^  church  published 
"a  declaration  of  faith  of  English  people  remaining  at 
Amsterdam,  in  Holland."  The  article  relating  to  bap- 
tism is  as  follows:  "That  every  church  is  to  receive  in 
all  their  members  by  the  confession  of  their  faith  and 
sins  [modern  Baptists  do  not  teach  this  apostolic  prac- 
tice, but  the  Disciples  of  Christ  do,  mark  that],  wrought 
by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  according  to  the  primi- 
tive institution  and  practice.  And  therefore,  churches 
constituted  after  any  other  manner  [mark  that  too],  or 
of  any  other  persons,  are  not  according  to  Christ's  tes- 
tament. That  baptism  or  washing  with  water  is  the 
outward  manifestation  of  dying  unto  sin  and  walking  in 
newness  of  life  ;  and  therefore  in  nowise  appertaineth  to 
infants."  Many  members  of  the  Brownist  or  Independ- 
ent denomination  held  Baptist  views.  An  Independ- 
ent congregation  in  London,  gathered   in   the  year 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


99 


1616,  included  several  such  persons,  and  as  the  congre- 
gation was  larger  than  could  conveniently  meet  together 
in  times  of  persecution,  they  agreed  to  allow  these 
persons  to  constitute  a  distinct  congregation,  which  was 
formed  on  the  12th  of  September,  1633;  and  upon  this 
the  majority,  if  not  all,  of  the  new  congregation  were 
baptized.  Another  Baptist  church  was  formed  in  Lon- 
don, in  1639.  These  churches  were  "Particular"  or 
Calvinistic  Baptists.  The  church  formed  in  1609  at 
Amsterdam  held  Arminian  views.  In  1644  a  Confession 
of  Faith  was  published  in  the  names  of  seven  congrega- 
tions in  London,  "commonly  (though  falsely)  called 
Anabaptists,"  in  which  were  included  the  two  congre- 
gations just  mentioned.  The  article  on  baptism  is  as 
follows:  "That  baptism  is  an  ordinance  of  the  New 
Testament  given  by  Christ  to  be  dispensed  only  upon 
persons  professing  faith,  or  that  are  disciples,  or  taught, 
who,  upon  a  profession  of  faith  [not  the  recital  of  a 
dreamy  "experience,"  as  modern  Baptists  hold]  ought 
to  be  baptized."  "The  way  and  manner  of  dispensing 
this  ordinance  the  Scripture  holds  out  to  be  dipping  or 
plunging  the  whole  body  under  water." 

They  made  a  clear  distinction  between  the  rights 
of  conscience  and  the  rights  of  the  civil  magistrates. 
After  showing  their  willingness  to  yield  "subjection 
and  obedience  "  to  the  magistrates,  as  unto  the  Lord, 
and  after  indulging  the  hope  that  God  would  "incline 
the  magistrates'  hearts  so  far  to  tender  our  consciences 
as  that  we  might  be  protected  by  them  from  wrong, 
injury,  oppression  and  molestation,"  they  proceed  to 
say:  "  But  if  God  withhold  the  magistrates'  allowance 
and  furtherance  herein,  yet  we  must,  notwithstanding, 
proceed  together  in  Christian  communion,  not  daring 


lOO 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 


to  give  place  to  suspend  our  practice,  but  to  walk  in 
obedience  to  Christ  in  the  profession  and  holding  forth 
this  faith  before  mentioned,  even  in  the  midst  of  all 
trials  and  afflictions,  not  accounting  our  goods,  lands, 
wives,  children,  fathers,  mothers,  brethren,  sisters,  yea, 
and  our  own  lives,  dear  unto  us,  so  that  we  may  finish 
our  course  with  joy  ;  remembering  always  that  we  ought 
to  obey  God  rather  than  men."  They  close  their  Con- 
fession thus:  "  If  any  take  this  that  we  have  said  to  be 
heresy,  then  do  we  with  the  apostle  freely  confess,  that 
after  the  way  which  they  call  heresy  worship  we  the 
God  of  our  fathers,  believing  all  things  which  are  written 
in  the  Law  and  in  the  Prophets  and  Apostles,  desiring 
from  our  souls  to  disclaim  all  heresies  and  opinions 
which  are  not  after  Christ,  and  to  be  steadfast,  immov- 
able, always  abounding  in  the  work  of  the  Lord,  as 
knowing  our  labor  shall  not  be  in  vain  in  the  Lord." 
This  breathing  spell,  however,  was  not  of  long  continu- 
ance, for  soon  after  the  Restoration,  in  1660,  the  meet- 
ings of  Nonconformists  were  continually  disturbed  by 
the  constables,  and  their  preachers  were  carried  before 
the  magistrates  and  fined  or  imprisoned,  of  which 
numerous  instances  could  be  given. 

The  history  of  the  persecution  of  Baptists,  as  well  as 
of  other  Protestant  dissenters,  ceases  with  the  Revolu- 
tion of  1688,  and  the  passing  of  the  Act  of  Toleration 
in  1689.  The  removal  of  the  remaining  disabilities, 
such  as  those  imposed  by  the  Test  and  Corporation 
Acts  repealed  in  1828,  has  no  special  bearing  on  Bap- 
tists more  than  on  other  Nonconformists.  The  ministers 
of  the  "three  denominations  of  dissenters" — Presbyte- 
rians, Independents  and  Baptists — resident  in  London 
and  the  neighborhood,  had  the  privilege  accorded  to 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


lOI 


them  of  presenting  on  proper  occasions  an  address  to 
the  sovereign  in  state,  a  privilege  which  they  still  enjoy. 

It  is  unfortunate  that  modern  Baptists  have  not  car- 
ried out  the  principles  of  reform  as  proclaimed  by  the 
Baptists  of  the  seventeenth  century,  who  verged  very 
close  upon  apostolic  restoration ;  for  we  see  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  early  Baptists  that  they,  upon  profession  of 
faith,  baptized  believers  into  the  one  body  of  Christ, 
and  that,  too,  without  postponement.  The  early  Bap- 
tists depended  upon  the  Word  of  God  as  the  source  of 
enlightenment,  regeneration  and  sanctification,  and  not 
on  a  "Christian  experience" — not  on  special  illumina- 
tion without  the  Word  of  God — not  on  the  mystic  and 
twistic  operations  of  an  abstract  Spirit,  out  of  which 
theory  of  conversion  have  come,  in  the  modern  Baptist 
Church,  illusions,  hallucinations,  sensuistic  impressions, 
ecstasies,  dreams  and  many  other  vagaries.  The  Bap- 
tists of  the  seventeenth  century  had  a  clearer  perception 
of  apostolic  teaching,  had  a  more  comprehensive  view 
or  grasp  of  the  scheme  of  redemption,  and  approxi- 
mated more  nearly  the  New  Testament  order  of  things, 
than  the  modern  school  of  Baptists,  who  have  been 
spoiled  by  contact  with  pedobaptist  "orthodoxy" — by 
contact  with  "Evangelical  Churches" — whose  smiles 
they  court,  and  whose  ill-will  they  seek  to  propitiate. 
The  earlier  Baptists  did  not  baptize  into  the  Baptist 
Church,  as  is  the  modern  practice,  but  they  baptized 
believing  penitents  "into  the  one  body  of  Christ," 
which  sounds  exactly  like  apostolic  teaching.  We  read 
of  no  monthly  meetings  called  for  the  examination  of 
converts  who  gave  an  "  experience"  of  something  that 
never  occurred,  except  in  the  imagination  of  the  con- 
vert; nor  do  we  read  that  their  "experience,"  wrought 


I02 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 


by  the  strivings  of  a  "still  small  voice,"  was  taken  as 
an  evidence  of  pardon  ;  nor  do  we  read  of  sinners  being 
pardoned  before  immersion  into  the  one  body;  nor  do 
we  learn  from  the  records  that  they  held  monthly  com- 
munion seasons,  instead  of  communing  on  every  first 
day  of  the  week. 


THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED 
STATES. 


We  continue  our  observations  upon  the  origin  and 
kistory  of  the  Baptist  Church.  Some  writers  (as,  for 
instance,  Orchard,  in  his  History  of  Foreign  Baptists, 
London,  1838)  have  attempted  to  trace  an  uninterrupted 
succession  of  Baptist  churches  from  the  time  of  the 
apostles  down  to  the  present.  He  gives  as  the  sum- 
ming up  of  his  researches,  that  "all  Christian  commu- 
nities during  the  first  three  centuries  were  of  the  Baptist 
denomination  in  constitution  and  practice.  In  the 
middle  of  the  third  century  the  Novation  Baptists 
established  separate  and  independent  societies,  which 
continued  until  the  end  of  the  sixth  age,  when  these 
communities  were  succeeded  by  the  Paterines,  which 
continued  until  the  Reformation  (1517).  The  Oriental 
Baptist  churches  with  their  successors,  the  Paulicians, 
continued  in  their  purity  until  the  tenth  century,  when 
they  visited  France,  resuscitating  and  extending  the 
Christian  profession  in  Languedoc,  where  they  flour- 
ished till  the  Crusading  army  scattered,  or  drowned  in 
blood,  one  million  of  unoffending  professors.  The 
Baptists  in  Piedmont  and  Germany  are  exhibited  as 
existing  under  different  names  down  to  the  Reformation. 
These  churches,  with  their  genuine  successors,  the 
Mennonites  of  Holland,  are  connectedly  and  chronolog- 
ically detailed  to  the  present  period." 

We  showed  in  a  previous  article  that  the  Baptist 
,  (103) 


104      THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

Church  could  not  be  traced  beyond  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, and  that  the  Church,  or  sect  rather,  had  its  rise 
among  the  Anabaptists.  As  a  contradiction  of  Orchard's 
assumptions  the  Christian  Review  (January,  1855,  p. 
23),  the  leading  Baptist  quarterly  of  America,  speaks 
as  follows : 

"We  know  of  no  assumption  more  arrogant,  and 
more  destitute  of  proper  historic  support,  than  that 
which  claims  to  be  able  to  trace  the  distinct  and  un- 
broken existence  of  a  church  substantially  Baptist  from 
the  time  of  the  apostles  down  to  our  own."  Thus  also 
Cutting  (^Historic  Vindications,  Boston,  1859,  P-  H) 
remarks  on  such  attempts:  "I  have  little  confidence  in 
the  results  of  any  attempt  of  that  kind  which  have  met 
my  notice,  and  I  attach  little  value  to  inquiries  pursued 
for  the  predetermined  purpose  of  such  a  demonstra- 
tion." 

The  Baptist  churches  in  the  United  States  o-^e  their  origin  to  Roger 
Williams,  who,  before  his  immersion,  was  an  Episcopalian  minister. 
He  was  persecuted  for  opposing  the  authority  of  the  State  in  ecclesias- 
tical affairs  and  for  principles  which  "  tended  to  Anabaptism."  In 
1639  he  was  immersed  by  Ezekiel  Holliman,  and  in  turn  immersed 
Holliman  and  ten  others,  who  with  him  organized  a  Baptist  church  at 
Providence,  Rhode  Island.  A  few  years  before  (1635),  though  un- 
known to  Williams,  a  Baptist  preacher  of  England,  Hansard  Knollys, 
had  settled  in  New  Hampshire  and  taken  charge  of  a  church  in  Dover; 
but  he  resigned  in  1639  and  returned  to  England.  Williams  obtained 
in  1644  a  charter  for  the  colony  which  he  and  his  associates  had 
founded  in  Rhode  Island,  with  full  and  entire  freedom  of  conscience. 
Rhode  Island  thus  became  the  first  Christian  State  which  ever  granted 
full  religious  liberty.  In  other  British  colonies  the  persecution  against 
the  Baptists  continued  a  long  time.  Massachusetts  issued  laws  against 
them  in  1644,  imprisoned  several  Baptists  in  1651,  and  banished  others 
in  1669.  In  1680  the  doors  of  a  Baptist  meeting-house  were  nailed 
up.  In  New  York  laws  were  issued  against  them  in  1662,  in  Virginia 
in  1664.    With  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  persecu- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


105 


tion  greatly  abated.  TLey  were  released  from  tithes  in  1727  in  Massa- 
chueetts,  in  1729  in  New  Hampshire  and  Connecticut,  but  not  before 
1785  in  Virginia.  The  spread  of  their  principles  was  greatly  hindered 
by  these  persecutions,  especially  in  the  South,  where  in  1776  they 
counted  about  one  hundred  societies.  After  the  Revolution  they 
spread  with  extraordinary  rapidity,  especially  in  the  South  and  South- 
west, and  were  inferior  in  this  respect  only  to  the  Methodists.  la 
1817  a  triennial  general  convention  was  organized,  which,  however, 
has  since  been  discontinued.  In  1845  the  discussion  of  the  slavery 
question  led  to  a  division  of  the  Northern  and  Southern  Baptists.  The 
destruction  of  slavery,  in  consequence  of  the  failure  of  the  Great 
Rebellion  and  the  adoption  of  the  Constitutional  Amendment  in  1865, 
led  to  efforts  to  reunite  the  societies  of  the  Northern  and  Southern 
States.  The  Northern  associations  generally  expressed  a  desire  to  co- 
operate again  with  the  Southern  brethren  in  the  fellowship  of  Christian 
labor,  but  they  demanded  from  the  Southern  associations  a  profession 
of  loyalty  to  the  United  States  Government,  and  they  themselves 
deemed  it  necessary  to  repeat  the  testimony  which,  during  the  war, 
they  had,  at  each  annual  meeting,  borne  against  slavery.  The 
Southern  associations  that  met  during  the  year  1865  were  unanimously 
in  favor  of  continuing  their  former  separate  societies,  and  against  fra- 
ternizing with  the  Northern  societies.  They  censured  the  American 
Baptist  Home  Missionary  Society  for  proposing,  without  consultation 
or  co-operation  with  the  churches,  associations,  conventions  or  organ- 
ized boards  of  the  Southern  States,  to  appoint  ministers  and  mission- 
aries to  preach  and  raise  chun'hes  within  the  bounds  of  the  Southern 
associations.  Some  of  the  Southern  associations,  like  that  of  Virginia, 
consequently  advised  the  churches  "to  decline  any  co-operation  or 
fellowship  with  any  of  the  missionaries,  ministers  or  agents  of  the 
American  Baptist  Home  Mission  Society."  A  number  of  negro  Bap- 
tist chnrches  in  tlie  Southern  States  separated  from  the  Southern 
associati(;ns,  and  either  connected  themselves  with  those  of  the  North, 
or  organized,  with  the  co-operation  of  the  Northern  missionaries,  inde- 
pendent associations. — McClintock  and  Strong's  Bib  ,  Theo.  and  Ee.  Enc, 
Vol.  1.,  p.  654. 

In  the  United  States  the  Baptist  family  is  divided 
into  the  Regular  Baptists,  or  Missionary  Baptists, 
Seventh-day  Baptists.  Anti-mission  Baptists,  Free-Will 
Baptists  and  Six  Principle  Baptists.    The  Free  or  Open 


:o6      THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

Comiminion  Baptists,  who  were  organized  about  1810, 
united  in  1841  with  the  Free- Will  Baptists. 

The  Baptists  have  no  standard  Confession  of  Faith. 
The  congregation  being  independent  as  to  governmental 
affairs,  each  adopts  its  own  articles  of  belief  In  Eng- 
land the  "Old  Connection"  are  chiefly  Socinians ;  the 
"  New  Connection,"  evangelical  Arminians  ;  the  "Par- 
ticular Baptists,"  Calvinists  of  various  shades.  In  the 
United  States,  the  Regular  Baptists  are  for  the  most 
part  Calvinists.  The  Baptists  generally  form  '  'Associa- 
tions,"  which,  however,  exercise  no  jurisdiction  over 
the  churches.  They  recognize  no  higher  church  officers 
than  pastors  and  deacons.  Elders  are  sometimes  or- 
dained as  evangelists  and  missionaries.  Though  Regular 
Baptists  accept  of  no  authority  other  than  the  Bible  for 
their  faith  and  practice,  yet  nearly  all  of  the  societies 
have  a  Confession  of  Faith  in  pamphlet  form  for  distri- 
bution among  its  members.  The  "New  Hampshire 
Confession  of  Faith,"  which  contains  nineteen  Articles, 
is  more  generally  used  among  the  societies  in  the  North 
and  East,  while  the  "  Philadelphia  Confession  of  Faith," 
which  embodies  twenty-five  Articles,  is  the  one  gener- 
ally adopted  in  the  South.  The  American  Baptist 
churches  are  more  rigid  on  the  question  of  "close  com- 
munion "  than  are  the  British  Baptist  churches.  The 
German  Baptists  of  America,  commonly  known  as 
Dunkers,  but  who  denominate  themselves  "Brethren," 
originated  at  Schwarzenan,  in  Germany,  in  1708,  and 
were  driven  by  persecution  to  America,  between  the 
years  17 19  and  1729.  They  purposely  neglect  any 
record  of  their  proceedings,  and  are  opposed  to  statistics, 
which  they  believe  to  foster  pride.    They  originally  set- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


tied  in  Pennsylvania,  but  are  now  most  numerous  in 
Ohio  and  Indiana. 

The  Regular  Baptists,  unlike  most  of  the  Protestant 
denominations,  have  no  distinctive  creed  which  is  made 
a  test  of  fellowship.  They  have,  however,  a  ' '  visible 
church"  and  an  "  invisible  church,"  which  duplex  order 
of  things,  unlike  the  Church  of  Christ  as  founded  by  his 
apostles,  is  the  source  of  much  confusion  and  mysticism. 
The  spiritual  birth,  as  taught  by  Baptists,  brings  sinners 
into  the  "invisible  church,"  while,  at  the  same  time, 
regenerated  sinners  in  the  "invisible  church"  can  not 
come  into  the  "visible  church" — into  the  Baptist 
Church — until  they  are  immersed  !  To  say  the  least, 
this  is  not  New  Testament  teaching.  Though  Baptists 
may  not  intend  it,  this  is  a  practical  denial  that  baptism, 
as  the  consummating  act  in  the  divine  process,  is  for  the 
remission  of  sins — a  positive  contradiction  of  the  words 
of  the  apostle  Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Baptists 
teach  that  sinners  are  directly  illuminated  and  regener- 
ated by  the  special  and  mystic  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  without  the  mediation  of  the  Word  of  God,  and 
that  a  special  grace,  not  revealed  in  the  gospel,  is  neces- 
sary to  convict  and  convert  the  sinner.  This  is  a  prac- 
tical nullification  of  "the  gospel"  as  "  the  power  of  God 
unto  salvation  to  all  them  who  believe."  They  claim 
that  by  the  direct  regenerating  influence  of  the  Spirit, 
the  convicted  sinner  is  made  conscious,  without  the  testi- 
mony of  God's  word,  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  of 
justification,  and  of  adoption  into  the  family  of  God — 
into  the  "  invisible  church."  He  is  called  upon  to  give 
a  "Christian  experience"  of  what  he  saw  and  felt,  as- 
an  evidence  of  pardon,  thus  setting  aside  the  Word  of 
God,  or  the  law  of  pardon  in  the  gospel,  as  the  only 


I08       THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


revealed  evidence.  The  convert  tells  what  the  Lord  has 
done  for  him  through  the  strivings  of  tlie  Spirit,  and 
instead  of  relying  on  the  testimonies  of  God's  word  for 
evidence  of  pardon,  such  as  was  preached  by  the  apos- 
tles, he  revels  in  dreams  and  fancies,  and  substitutes  his 
feelings,  called  a  "Christian  experience,"  for  the  law  of 
pardon,  as  proclaimed  by  the  apostles  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

According  to  such  mystical  teaching,  the  sinner  is 
regenerated,  born  of  God,  saved,  justified,  sanctified, 
adopted  and  made  a  child  of  God  without  the  birth  of 
baptism !  And  yet  this  alleged  child  of  God — directly 
regenerated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  saved  from  his  sins, 
justified,  sanctified  and  adopted — can  not  enter  the 
Baptist  Church — the  "  visible  church  " — until  he  is  im- 
mersed !  Here  is  the  startling  disclosure  made  that 
immersion  is  a  non-essentiaV  in  constituting  a  sinner  a 
child  of  God — a  citizen  of  the  "  invisible  kingdom" — 
but  that  in  order  to  become  a  child  in  the  Baptist  family 
— a  member  in  the  "visible  church" — immersion  is 
made  very  essential!  Such  mystical  teaching  did  not 
obtain  in  the  apostolic  church,  and  hence  we  have  good 
reason  for  rejecting  it.  As  neither  Christ  nor  the  apos- 
tles ever  founded  a  Baptist  church,  nor  taught  the  direct 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  conversion  of  sinners, 
nor  appointed  "monthly  meetings"  where  converts 
might  give  the  "experience"  of  their  feelings  as  an  evi- 
dence of  pardon,  nor  appointed  the  celebration  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  but  once  a  month,  we  reject  all  such  theol- 
ogy as  unscriptural  and  non-apostolic.  By  such  dreamy 
speculation,  and  with  no  other  evidence  but  the  feelings 
of  the  misguided  sinner,  the  Baptists  contradict  (through 
ignorance  of  the  plan  of  salvation,  it  may  be)  the  doc- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEJIENTS. 


trine  that  the  Word  of  God  is  the  "  sword  of  the  Spirit," 
which  "kills  and  makes  alive."  Surely,  with  such  evi- 
dence before  us,  we  dare  not  say  that  the  Baptist  Church 
is  identical  with  the  Church  of  Christ,  which  the  apos- 
tles founded,  and  who  made  immersion  into  the  name 
of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
essential  to  salvation,  a  doctrine  which  the  Baptist 
Church  ignores. 


ORIGIN  OF  METHODISM. 


John  Wesley,  the  founder  of  Methodism,  was  born 
at  Epworth,  Lincolnshire,  England,  June  17,  1703.  He 
was  raised  in  the  Church  of  England,  was  ordained  a 
priest  in  1728,  by  Bishop  Potter,  and  died  an  Episco- 
palian. At  the  age  of  thirty-five  he  was  scarcely  known 
beyond  the  academic  circles  of  Oxford.  From  child- 
hood he  was  deeply  devout  and  religious  and  conscien- 
tious, which  characteristics  he  inherited  from  a  mother 
of  superior  endowments  and  of  rare  excellency  of  char- 
acter. His  love  of  learning  was  very  strong,  and  he 
was  very  studious  at  college,  but  "  his  poverty  held  him 
back  from  the  costly  vices  which  enslaved  many  of  his 
college  companions."  It  is  said  by  one  of  his  biograph- 
ers that  his  uncommonly  fine  traits  of  character,  and  his 
narrow,  not  to  say  marvelous,  escape  from  the  burning 
rectory  when  he  was  six  years  of  age,  gave  birth  in  the 
mind  of  his  mother  to  an  impression  that  this  child  was 
destined  to  an  extraordinary  career.  She  therefore  con- 
secrated him  to  God  with  special  solemnity,  resolving 
"to  be  more  particularly  careful  *  *  *  to 
instill  into  his  mind  the  principles  of  religion  and  virtue." 
He  received  some  of  his  first  religious  impressions  while 
reading  the  Christian! s  Pattern,  by  Thomas  a  Kempis. 
The  perusal  of  Law's  Christian  Perfection  and  Serious 
Call  deepened  these  convictions,  "  and  led  him  to  devote 
himself,  soul,  body  and  substance,  to  the  service  of 
God."    "  But,  owing  to  his  failure  to  comprehend  the 

(no) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Ill 


scriptural  doctrine  of  salvation  by  faith  only,  he  groped 
in  the  dark  through  thirteen  years  of  ascetic  self-denial, 
ritualistic  observances,  unceasing  prayer,  and  works  of 
charity,  before  he  gained  an  assurance  that  God,  for 
Christ's  sake,  had  pardoned  his  sins.''  And  his  change 
of  heart,  "through  those  long,  wearisome,  comfortless 
years  of  seeking  God  without  finding  him,"  is  thus 
related : 

And  when,  on  his  voyage  to  Savannah  (Ga.),  he  saw  some  pious 
Moravians  rejoicing,  while  he  was  shaking  with  fears  of  death,  amid 
the  fury  of  a  storm  which  apparently  was  driving  them  into  the  jaws 
of  destruction,  he  did  not  suspect  that  his  fear  was  the  fruit  of  his 
erroneous  views.  He  talked  much  with  some  of  the  Moravian  brethren 
after  his  arrival  in  Savannah  ;  but  it  was  not  until  after  his  return  to 
England  in  1738,  that  Peter  Bohler,  a  Moravian  preacher  in  London, 
after  much  conversation,  aided  by  the  testimonies  of  several  living 
witnesses,  convinced  him  that  to  gain  peace  of  mind  he  must  renounce 
that  dependence  upon  his  own  works  which  had  hitherto  been  the  bane 
of  his  experience,  and  replace  it  with  a  full  reliance  on  the  blood  of 
Christ  shed  for  htm.  To  gain  this  faith  he  strove  with  all  possible 
earnestness.  And  at  a  Moravian  Society  meeting  in  Aldersgate  Street, 
while  one  was  reading  Luther's  statement  of  the  change  which  God 
works  in  the  heart  through  faith,  Wesley  says:  "I  felt  my  heart 
strangely  warmed.  I  felt  I  did  trust  in  Christ,  Christ  alone,  for  salva- 
tion ;  and  an  assurance  was  given  me  that  he  had  taken  away  my  sins, 
even  mine,  and  saved  me  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."— D. 
Wise,  D.D.,  in  McGlintock  and  Strong's  Enc,  Vol.  VI.,  p.  913.) 

In  November,  1729,  the  Wesley  brothers,  Whitefield 
and  their  associates,  about  a  dozen  young  men,  students 
of  Oxford  University — formed  themselves  into  a  society 
for  purposes  of  mutual  moral  and  spiritual  improve- 
ment. As  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  which 
had  lost  all  love  of  souls  and  all  desire  for  spiritual  life 
through  formalism  and  ritualism,  these  young  men 
sought  to  excite  new  life  into  a  dead  body,  and  to  stim- 
ulate piety  among  a  people  where  none  existed.  In 


112 


ORIGIN  OF  METHODISM. 


view  of  the  corrupt  and  lifeless  condition  of  the  Church 
of  England,  they  voluntarily  abandoned  themselves  to  a 
life  of  self-denial  and  personal  consecration.  By  instruct- 
ing the  children  of  the  neglected  poor ;  by  visiting  the 
sick  and  the  inmates  of  prisons  and  almshouses  ;  by  a 
strict  observance  of  the  fasts  appointed  by  the  Church, 
and  by  scrupulous  exactness  in  their  attendance  upon 
public  worship,  they  became  objects  of  general  notice. 
They  were  severely  criticised  and  treated  with  contempt 
by  their  formalistic  contemporaries,  and,  as  is  usual  in 
such  cases,  their  sincerity  called  in  question  by  mockers 
and  scoffers.  Even  by  their  fellow-students  they  were 
called  in  turn,  Sacramentarians,  Bible-bigots,  Bible-moths, 
the  Godly  Club.  One,  a  student  of  Christ-Church  Col- 
lege, with  greater  reverence  than  his  fellows,  and  more 
learning,  observed,  in  regard  to  their  methodical  manner 
of  life,  that  a  new  sect  of  Methodists  had  sprung  up, 
alluding  to  the  ancient  school  of  physicians  known  by 
that  name.  The  appellation  obtained  currency,  and. 
although  the  title  is  still  sometimes  used  reproachfully 
as  expressive  of  enthusiasm  or  undue  religious  strict- 
ness, it  has  become  the  acknowledged  designation  of 
one  of  the  largest  bod'ies  of  religious  people  of  modern 
times. 

"  Wesley's  idea  at  this  time,  and  for  many  years  after- 
ward," says  Keats  {^History  of  the  Free  Churches  of  Eng- 
land, p.  363).  "  was  merely  to  revive  the  state  of  religion 
in  the  Church ;  but  he  knew  enough  of  the  condition  of 
society  in  England,  and  of  human  nature,  to  be  aware 
that,  unless  those  who  had  been  brought  under  the 
awakening  influence  of  the  gospel  met  together,  and 
assisted  each  other  in  keeping  alive  the  fire  which  had 
been  lit  in  their  hearts,  it  must,  in  many  instances. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


seriously  diminish,  if  not  altogether  die  out."  By  this 
fact  it  will  be  seen  that  it  was  no  part  of  the  design  of 
Wesley  and  his  associates  to  found  a  new  religious  sect. 
''He  considered  them  all  members  of  the  Church  of 
England  —  zealous  for  her  welfare,  and  loyal  to  her 
legitimate  authorities. "  So  says  a  Methodist  authority,, 
because  such  are  the  facts  of  history. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL 
CHURCH. 


The  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States 
received  its  official  title,  as  a  distinct  body,  at  what  is 
historically  known  as  the  "  Christian  Conference,"  which 
began  its  sessions  in  Baltimore,  on  Friday,  December 
24,  1784.  The  first  Methodist  service  in  America  is 
supposed  to  have  been  held  in  the  year  1766,  in  the  city 
of  New  York,  by  Philip  Embury,  an  Irish  emigrant  and 
local  preacher,  a  carpenter  by  trade,  who  was  moved 
thereto  by  the  stirring  appeals  of  Barbara  Heck,  an 
Irish  woman,  whose  name  is  illustrious  in  the  annals  of 
the  denomination.  In  the  course  of  a  year  or  two  their 
numbers  had  considerably  increased,  and  they  wrote  to 
John  Wesley  requesting  him  to  send  them  out  some 
competent  preachers.  Two  at  once  offered  themselves 
for  the  work,  Richard  Boardman  and  Joseph  Pilmoor, 
who  were  followed  in  1771  by  Francis  Asbury  and  Rich- 
ard Wright.  The  agitations  preceding  the  War  of 
Independence,  which  soon  afterward  broke  out,  inter- 
rupted the  labors  of  the  English  Methodist  preachers 
in  America,  all  of  whom,  with  the  exception  of  Asbury, 
returned  to  England  before  the  close  of  the  year  1777; 
but  their  place  appears  to  have  been  supplied  by  others 
of  native  origin,  and  they  continued  to  prosper,  so  that, 
at  the  termination  of  the  Revolutionary  struggle,  they 
numbered  forty-three  preachers  and  thirteen  thousand 
seven  hundred  and  forty  members. 

("4) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Up  to  this  time  the  American  Wesleyan  Methodists 
had  laid  no  claim  to  being  a  distinct  religious  organiza- 
tion. Like  Wesley  himself,  they  regarded  themselves 
as  members  of  the  English  Episcopal  Church,  or  rather 
of  that  branch  of  it  then  existing  in  this  country, 
and  their  preachers  as  a  body  of  irregular  auxiliaries  to 
the  ordained  clergy.  It  is  said  that  "Episcopal 
churches  are  still  standing  in  New  York  (or  were  but  a 
few  years  since)  and  elsewhere,  at  whose  altars  Embury, 
Pilmoor,  Boardman,  Strawbridge,  Asbury  and  Rankin, 
the  earliest  Methodist  preachers,  received  the  holy  com- 
munion." But  the  recognition  of  the  United  States  as 
an  independent  country,  and  the  difference  of  feeling 
and  interests  that  necessarily  sprung  up  between  the 
congregations  in  America  and  those  in  England,  ren- 
dered the  formation  of  an  independent  society  inevitable. 
Wesley  became  conscious  of  this,  and  met  the  emer- 
gency in  a  manner  as  bold  as  it  was  unexpected. 
Himself  only  a  presbyter  in  the  Church  of  England,  he 
persuaded  himself  that  in  the  primitive  Church  a  pres- 
byter and  a  bishop  were  one  and  the  same  order,  differ- 
ing only  as  to  their  official  function ;  he,  assuming  the 
office  of  the  latter,  and,  with  the  assistance  of  some 
other  presbyters  who  had  joined  his  movement,  set 
apart  and  ordained  Rev.  Thomas  Coke,  D.C.  L.,  of 
Oxford  University,  Bishop  of  the  infant  Church,  Sep- 
tember 2,  1784.  Coke  immediately  sailed  for  America, 
and  appeared,  with  his  credentials,  at  the  Conference 
held  at  Baltimore,  December  25,  of  the  same  year.  He 
was  unanimously  recognized  by  the  assembly  of  preach- 
ers, and  appointed  Asbury  coadjutor  bishop,  and  ordained 
several  preachers  to  the  offices  of  deacon  and  elder. 
Wesley  also  granted  the  preachers  permission  (which 


1  l6     ORIGIN  OF  THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 


shows  the  extensive  ecclesiastical  power  he  wielded)  to- 
organize  a  separate  and  independent  church  under  the 
Episcopal  form  of  government ;  hence  arose  the  "  Meth- 
odist Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica. " 

To  facilitate  the  work  of  Coke  and  Asbury,  Wesley 
furnished  them  with  a  "Sunday  Service,"  or  liturgy,  a 
collection  of  songs  and  hymns,  and  also  "The  Articles 
of  Religion,"  twenty-four  of  them,  which  he  selected 
from  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the  Book  of  Prayer, 
and  which  he  revised  for  the  benefit  of  the  churches  in 
the  United  States.  Upon  the  arrival  of  Coke  in 
America,  accompanied  by  his  ordained  elders  and 
deacons  (he  being  ordained  by  Wesley  "superintend- 
ent"— afterward  tortured  into  bishop),  a  special  confer- 
ence or  convention  of  the  itinerant  preachers  was 
summoned,  and  on  the  24th  of  December,  sixty  of  them 
assembled  in  the  Lovely  Lane  Chapel  in  the  city  of 
Baltimore.  Dr.  Coke  took  the  chair,  and  presented  the 
following  letter  from  Wesley,  written  eight  days  after 
the  ordinations,  and  tersely  stating  the  grounds  of  what 
he  had  done  and  advised.  As  this  letter  contains  the 
pith  of  Episcopal  Methodism,  we  give  it  entire  : 

To  Dt.  Coke,  Mr.  Asbury,  and  our  Brethren  in  North  America : — Bv  » 
Tery  numeroos  train  of  providences  many  of  the  provinces  of  North 
America  are  totally  disjoined  from  their  mother  country,  and  erect«d 
into  independent  States.  The  English  Government  has  no  authority 
over  them,  either  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  any  more  than  over  the  States 
of  Holland.  A  civil  authority  is  exercised  over  them,  partly  by  the 
Congress  and  partly  by  the  provincial  assemblies  ;  but  no  one  either 
exercises  or  claims  any  ecclesiastical  authority  at  all.  In  this  peculiar 
ritnation  some  thousands  of  the  inhabitants  of  these  States  desire  my 
•dvice  ;  and  in  compliance  with  their  desire,  I  have  drawn  up  a  little 
sketch. 

Lord  King's  account  of  the  Primitive  Church  convinced  me,  many 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


yeare  ago,  that  bishops  and  presbyters  are  of  the  same  order,  and  con- 
sequently have  the  same  right  to  ordain.  For  many  years  I  haye  been 
importuned,  from  time  to  time,  to  exercise  this  right,  by  ordaining 
part  of  our  traveling  preachers.  But  I  have  still  refused,  not  only  for 
peace'  sake,  but  because  I  was  determined  as  little  as  possible  to  violate 
the  established  order  of  the  National  Church,  to  which  I  belonged. 

But  the  case  is  widely  different  between  England  and  North 
America.  Here  there  are  bishops  who  have  a  legal  jurisdiction.  In 
America  there  are  none,  neither  any  parish  ministers ;  so  that  for 
some  hundred  miles  together  there  is  none  either  to  baptize  or  to 
administer  the  Lord's  Supper.  Here,  therefore,  my  scruples  are  at 
an  end,  and  I  conceive  myself  at  full  liberty,  as  I  violate  no  order  and 
invade  no  man's  right  by  appointing  and  sending  laborers  into  the 
harvest. 

I  have  accordingly  appointed  Dr.  Coke  and  Mr.  Francis  Asbury  to 
be  joint  superintendents  over  our  brethren  in  North  America,  as  also 
Richard  Whatcoat  and  Thomas  Vasey  to  act  as  elders  among  them,  by 
baptizing  and  administering  the  Lord's  Supper.  And  I  prepared  a 
liturgy  little  differing  from  that  of  the  Church  of  England  (I  think  the 
best  constituted  national  church  in  the  world),  which  I  advise  all  the 
traveling  preachers  to  use  on  the  Lord's-day  in  all  the  congregations, 
reading  the  litany  only  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  and  praying 
extempore  on  all  other  days.  I  also  advise  the  elders  to  administer 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord  on  every  Lord's-day. 

If  any  one  will  point  out  a  more  rational  and  scriptural  way  of  feed- 
ing and  guiding  those  poor  sheep  in  the  wilderness,  I  will  gladly 
embrace  it.  At  present  I  can  not  see  any  better  method  than  I  have 
taken. 

It  has,  indeed,  been  proposed  to  desire  the  English  bishops  to  ordaia 
part  of  our  preachers  for  America  ;  but  to  this  I  object:  (1)  1  desired 
the  bishop  of  London  to  ordain  only  one,  but  could  not  prevail.  (2) 
If  they  consented,  we  know  the  slowness  of  their  proceedings  ;  but  the 
matter  admits  of  no  delay.  (3)  If  they  would  ordain  them  now,  they 
would  likewise  expect  to  govern  them ;  and  how  grievously  would  this 
entangle  us  !  (4)  As  our  American  brethren  are  now  totally  disentan- 
gled, both  from  the  State  and  the  English  hierarchy,  we  dare  not 
entangle  them  again,  either  with  the  one  or  the  other.  They  are  now 
at  full  liberty  simply  to  follow  the  Scriptures  and  the  Primitive 
Church.  And  we  judge  it  best  that  they  should  stand  in  that  liberty 
wherewith  God  has  so  strangely  made  them  free. 


Il8     ORIGIN  OF  THE  MEIHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 

After  the  reading  and  consideration  of  this  document, 
it  was,  without  a  single  dissenting  voice,  regularly  and 
formally  "agreed  to  form  a  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
in  which  the  liturgy  (as  presented  by  Rev.  John  Wes- 
ley) should  be  read,  and  the  sacraments  be  administered 
by  a  superintendent,  elders  and  deacons,  who  shall  be 
ordained  by  a  presbytery,  using  the  Episcopal  form,  as 
prescribed  in  Rev.  Mr.  Wesley's  Prayer-book;"  or,  in 
the  language  of  the  Minutes  of  the  Conference,  "  follow- 
ing the  counsel  of  Mr.  John  Wesley,  who  recommended 
the  Episcopal  mode  of  government,  we  thought  it  best 
to  become  an  Episcopal  Church,  making  the  Episcopal 
office  elective,  and  the  elected  superintendent  or  bishop 
amenable  to  the  body  of  ministers  and  preachers." 

Wesley  was  an  Episcopalian,  and  thoroughly  believed 
in  the  Episcopal  form  of  church  governrrent.  ' '  I  firmly 
believe,"  he  said,  "I  am  a  scriptural  Episcopos,  as  much 
as  any  man  in  England  or  in  Europe;  "  but  he  did  not 
believe  in  an  "uninterrupted  succession."  When  he 
ordained  Coke  a  "superintendent,"  he  ordained  him  a 
bishop.  He  objected  to  the  title  as  it  was  used  in  the 
English  Church,  but  did  not  object  to  the  thing  itself. 
He  was  opposed  to  the  abuse  of  the  office,  not  the  use 
of  it.  At  any  rate,  the  Episcopacy  of  the  English 
Church  was  incorporated  into  the  Methodist  Church  of 
America,  with  three  orders  of  clergy,  viz.:  bishops, 
elders  and  deacons. 


WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 


Like  Luther,  Zwingle,  Calvin  and  Knox,  Wesley 
never  made  any  attempt  to  return  to  apostolic  practice, 
nor  did  either  of  these  Reformers  even  suggest  the  idea 
of  reproducing  the  Church  of  Christ  as  established  by 
the  apostles.  They  simply  aimed  to  re-form  existing 
ecclesiastical  institutions.  As  to  Wesley,  he  desired  to 
re-form  the  Church  of  England  by  vitalizing  and  spirit- 
ualizing its  priesthood,  and  by  arousing  the  activities 
of  its  membership ;  and,  as  respected  his  work  in 
America,  as  we  have  already  seen,  it  is  very  evident 
that  he  sought,  with  the  tact  and  diplomacy  of  a  crafty 
statesman,  to  adjust  the  Church  of  England  to  the  pecul- 
iar political  condition  of  the  government  of  the  United 
States — to  a  republican  form  of  government  as  contrasted 
with  a  kingly  government.  He  was  a  shrewd  manager 
in  politico-ecclesiastical  affairs.  He  was  a  proficient  in 
the  study  of  adaptations  of  means  to  the  consummation 
of  proposed  measures,  and  it  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that, 
up  to  this  day,  the  same  spirit  of  diplomacy — the  same 
spirit  of  accommodation  to  surrounding  influences — per- 
vades the  entire  fabric  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church.  That  Wesley  was  well  acquainted  with  New 
Testament  teaching  and  apostolic  practice,  is  a  fact 
made  evident  in  his  Explanatory  Notes  upon  the  New 
Testament,  in  his  Doctrinal  Tracts,  and  in  his  letters  of 
instructions  to  the  churches.  Indeed,  so  vigorously  did 
he  advocate  baptism  for  remission  of  sins  in  his  Doctrinal 

.  ("9) 


I20 


WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 


Tracts,  that  a  good  deal  of  what  he  said  upon  that  sub- 
ject has  been  expunged  in  the  latest  editions,  if  the 
work  itself  has  not  been  entirely  suppressed.  In  his 
letter  "to  Dr.  Coke,  Mr.  Asbury,  and  our  brethren  is 
North  America,"  which  we  reproduce  in  a  previous 
chapter,  he  ' '  advises  the  elders  to  administer  the  Supper 
of  the  Lord  oti  et'ery  LorcTs-day"  (which  sounds  very 
apostolic),  and  leaves  them  "at  full  liberty  simply  to 
follow  the  Scriptures  and  the  Primitive  Church  "  (which 
also  sounds  very  apostolic).  And  it  looks  very  apos- 
tolic when  we  quote  and  read  the  following  words  from 
the  Preface  of  his  "  New  Testament  Notes  "  :  "  Would 
to  God  that  all  tlie  party  names  and  tinscriptural  phrases 
and  forms,  which  have  divided  t/ie  Christian  world,  were 
forgot;  and  that  we  might  all  sit  down  togetlier  as  humble, 
loving  disciples  at  tJie  feet  of  our  common  Master,  to  /tear 
his  word,  to  imbibe  his  spirit,  and  to  transcribe  his  life  into 
our  own." 

The  case  of  John  Wesley  is  but  another  illustration  of 
the  fact  that  a  man  may,  as  a  scholar  and  as  an  honest 
interpreter  of  historical  facts,  acknowledge  and  advo- 
cate the  truth,  while  at  the  same  time  his  judgment  is 
swayed  by  ecclesiastical  associations,  and  by  a  love  of 
some  particular  form  of  theology,  or  by  self-interest, 
which  not  unfrequently  outweighs  all  considerations  for 
the  unity  and  peace  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  When  we 
open  histories,  and  read  the  works  of  commentators, 
and  examine  the  critical  and  exegetical  authorities  of 
educated  men,  we  are  made  to  rejoice  at  the  unanimity 
with  which  they  all  speak  of  apostolic  precedent  and 
practice,  and  to  rejoice  in  the  hope  that  the  restoration 
of  apostolic  Christianity  will  soon  become  an  accom- 
plished fact ;  but  when  we  take  a  survey  of  the  religious 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


121 


situation,  and  see  the  persistent  efforts  put  forth  by  the 
various  Protestant  denominations  to  maintain  ecclesias- 
tical distinctions,  and  to  support  antagonistic  creeds,  and 
to  apologize  for  divisions,  we  utterly  despair  of  realizing 
the  unity  of  Christians  upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible. 
Concerning  the  views  of  Wesley  on  church  government, 
we  here  produce  one  who  is  competent  to  speak.  Says 
Dr.  Curry,  of  the  Christian  Advocate  (New  York,  May 
25,  1871): 

No  fact  respecting  the  history  of  John  Wesley  is  more  clearly  mani- 
fect  than  that  he  was  always  a  strenuous  supporter  of  the  authority  of 
the  Established  Church  of  England.  He  jealously  regarded  the 
exclusive  ecclesiastical  authority  of  that  Church  in  all  that  he  did  as 
an  evangelist,  and  seemed  always  determined  that  while  he  lived  and 
ruled — and  it  was  always  understood  that  he  woiUd  rule  as  long  as 
he  lived — nothing  should  be  tolerated  in  his  societies  at  all  repugnant 
to  the  sole  and  exclusive  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  Established 
Church.  This  rule  was  applied  to  his  societies  in  America  before  the 
Revolution  just  as  strictly  as  to  those  in  England.  But  the  political 
separation  of  America  from  Great  Britain,  as  it  also  ended  the  author- 
ity of  the  English  Church  in  this  country,  made  it  lawful,  according 
to  his  theory  of  the  case,  for  the  Methodist  societies  in  America  to 
become  regularly  organized  churches. 

The  theological  tenets  and  dogmas  of  Wesleyan 
Methodism,  with  perhaps  two  or  three  modifications, 
are  the  same  as  those  which,  by  common  consent,  are 
at  present  deemed  "  evangelical "  or  "  orthodox. "  The 
articles  of  religion  drawn  up  by  Wesley  for  his  imme- 
diate followers,  and  substantially  adopted  by  all  Metho- 
dist bodies  since,  are  but  slightly  modified  from  those 
of  the  Established  Church  of  England.  The  sermons 
of  John  Wesley,  and  his  notes  on  the  New  Testament, 
are  recognized  by  his  followers  in  Great  Britain  and 
America  as  the  standard  of  Methodism,  and  as  the  basis 
of  their  theological  creed.     There  are,  according  to 


122 


WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 


McCHntock  and  Strong's  Encyclopedia,  about  nine  sub- 
divisions of  the  Methodist  body  in  the  old  country,  viz. : 
the  Wesleyan  Methodists;  the  Calvinistic  Methodists; 
the  Wesleyan  Methodist  New  Connection  ;  the  Band- 
Room  Methodists ;  the  Primitive  Methodists  ;  the  Byran- 
ites,  or  Bible  Christians ;  the  Primitive  Methodists  of 
Ireland ;  the  Protestant  Methodists ;  the  Wesleyan  Meth- 
odist Association  ;  the  Reformers  ;  the  Wesleyan  Reform 
Union.  In  the  United  States  we  have  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church ;  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church 
South  ;  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Church ;  the  African 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church ;  the  African  Methodist 
Episcopal  (Zion)  Church  ;  the  United  Brethren  in  Christ, 
sometimes  called  German  Methodists ;  the  Evangelical 
Association ;  the  Free  Methodist  Church  ;  the  Colored 
Methodist  Church,  besides  a  few  others  of  less  signifi- 
cance. According  to  the  apostle  Paul,  all  this  is  "car- 
nal," and  not  "spiritual."  "  The  unity  of  the  faith"  is 
not  found  in  all  these  divisions  and  subdivisions.  The 
apostles  of  the  Lamb  never  founded  one  of  these.  They 
have  all  originated  within  a  little  over  a  hundred  years. 
As  distinct  organizations,  they  are  all  of  the  "earth, 
earthy."  They  are  all  founded  upon  the  opinions  and 
speculations  and  dreams  of  men,  and  the  mark  of  the 
beast  is  impressed  upon  them  all.  At  the  Pan-Presby- 
terian Convocation,  held  in  Glasgow,  Scotland,  in  1877, 
Dr.  Bailie  declared  that  there  were  ' '  forty  branches  of 
the  Presbyterian  family"  in  existence,  but  he  failed  to 
tell  that  "the  trail  of  the  Serpent  is  over  them  all." 
In  making  these  remarks,  we  speak  not  of  good  men 
and  women,  and  of  intelligent  and  philanthropic  men 
and  women,  in  them  all ;  but  we  speak  of  the  systems 
of  theology  and  of  the  distinct  ecclesiastical  organiza- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


123 


tions  which  these  bodies  represent,  as  wickedly  sectarian, 
and  as  a  burning  disgrace  to  the  Author  of  Christianity. 

None  of  thesc  ^ects  originated  under  apostoHc  teach- 
ing, none  of  them  ran  be  dated  beyond  the  sixteenth 
century ;  and  hence,  as  misrepresenting  the  Church  of 
Christ,  which  the  apostles  founded,  we  reject  them  all. 
The  Methodist  theology  advocates  "justification  by 
faith  alone, "  and  the  preachers  of  that  distinctive  the- 
ology tell  us  that  it  is  a  doctrine  very  "  full  of  comfort," 
when  at  the  same  time,  be  it  known,  that  there  is  no 
such  doctrine  in  the  Word  of  God.  What  they  call  jus- 
tification by  faith  alone,  is  justification  by  sensuous 
feeling — an  ecstasy,  an  illusion,  a  dream,  a  vain  imagi- 
nation, the  delights  of  animal  magnetism — which  they 
tell  us  is  wrought  directly  by  the  mystic  impulse  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  without  illumination  and  conviction  by  the 
testimonies  of  God's  word.  The  Methodist  Church 
makes  baptism  a  "non-essential"  to  salvation,  thus 
directly  insulting  the  Author  of  the  Plan  of  Salvation, 
and  substituting  human  expediency  for  divine  law. 
The  Methodist  Episcopal  system  not  only  lodges  legis- 
lative authority  in  a  bench  of  bishops — in  a  General 
Conference — where  they  make  and  unmake  rules  and 
regulations  to  suit  the  varying  conditions  of  the  cap- 
tious and  exacting  world,  and  where  they  devise  how 
to  catch  the  tide  of  good  fortune  and  ride  out  upon  the 
wave  of  popular  applause,  but,  imitating  the  example 
of  Romanism,  it  transgresses  the  laws  of  God,  changes 
the  ordinances,  and  breaks  the  everlasting  covenant. 
(Isaiah  xxiv.  5.)  The  Episcopal  system,  wherever 
found,  whether  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Missal,  the 
Augsburg  Confession  of  Faith,  the  Heidelberg  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,  the  Westminster  Confession,  or  in  the 


124 


WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 


]Book  of  Prayer,  or  in  the  Methodist  Discipline,  recog- 
nizes infant  church-membership  as  the  corner-stone  of 
every  pedobaptist  edifice.  And,  setting  aside  immer- 
sion as  practiced  by  the  apostles,  and  which  by  the 
whole  world  of  learning  has  been  conceded  to  have 
been  the  exclusive  practice  of  the  Primitive  Church, 
these  innovators  upon  God's  plan  of  salvation  have 
substituted  mntism  and  affusion;  and  they  have  the 
effrontery  to  tell  the  sinful  world  that  sprinkling  and 
pouring  serve  the  same  purpose  as  immersion,  if  "  only 
the  heart  is  right " — as  if  wicked  men  could  have  a 
heart  right  in  the  sight  of  God  while  rejecting  the  posi- 
tive commands  of  the  Son  of  God  !  And  where  did  the 
"  INIourning  Bench  "  system  of  regeneration  come  from  ? 
Why,  it  is  hardly  fifty  years  of  age.  President  Finney, 
of  Oberlin  College,  in  his  book  on  "Revivals,"  issued 
within  the  last  thirty  years,  was  the  first  man  who  had 
the  courage  to  proclaim  from  the  house-tops  that  the 
"mourning  bench"  was  intended  to  take  the  place  of 
baptism  !  Viewed  from  the  angle  of  apostolic  teaching, 
we  surely  find  no  reformation  in  all  this;  on  the  other 
hand,  we  only  see  (ilf-formation.  We  find  that  the 
Methodist  Discipline  is  but  a  modification  of  the  Epis- 
copal Book  of  Prayer,  and  that  the  Book  of  Prayer  is 
only  a  modification  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Missal, 
which  had  its  origin  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury. All  these  creed-formularies  are  but  the  product 
of  the  Dark  Ages. 

The  Episcopalian  form  of  church  government,  whether 
found  in  the  Romish  Church,  or  in  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, or  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  or,  if  you 
please,  in  the  Mormon  Church,  is  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  a  spiritual  despotism,  possessing  not  the  least 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


125 


semblance  to  the  apostolic  order  of  things.  Luther 
attempted  to  reform  the  Romish  Church  by  striking  at 
the  rottenness  of  the  Romish  priesthood,  and  failed ; 
Zwingle  also  failed  in  the  same  direction ;  Calvin 
attempted  to  reform  the  Romish  Church  by  denouncing 
the  false  theological  dogmas  of  that  Church,  and  failed ; 
Knox,  by  herculean  blows,  undertook  to  reform  the 
despotic  government  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and 
failed;  Henry  VIII.  made  a  compromise  between  Roman- 
ism and  Protestantism,  and  produced  the  Established 
Church  of  England;  Wesley  essayed  to  reform  the 
Church  of  England,  and  produced — the  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church !  It  is  utterly  impossible  to  identify  any 
of  the  so-called  Protestant  Churches  with  the  Church  of 
Christ  as  established  by  his  apostles.  Every  one  of 
them  is  defective,  either  in  doctrine  or  in  government ; 
and,  being  defective  in  some  part,  and  therefore  antag- 
onistic to  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ,  we  accept 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other.  Remove  the  Pope  from 
the  Romish  Church,  and  the  system  falls  to  pieces, 
because  the  Papacy  is  the  center  of  unity  in  that  body. 
Remove  Episcopacy  from  the  Church  of  England,  and 
that  Church  falls  to  pieces,  because  Episcopacy  is  its 
center  of  unity.  Remove  Episcopacy  from  the  Metho- 
dist Episcopal  Church,  and  that  ecclesiastical  edifice  falls 
into  detached  fragments,  because  the  power  which  is 
lodged  in  the  Twelve  Bishops,  and  which  power  is 
exerted  through  the  General  Conference,  denotes  the 
center  of  unity  in  that  body.  What  we  propose  is  unity 
in  Jesus  Christ,  the  Head  of  the  Church — the  Head  of 
the  One  Body.  And  this  unity  never  can  be  effected, 
if  we  must  carry  with  us  the  trumpery  of  creeds  and 
confessions,  the  ecclesiastical  lumber  of  the  Dark  Ages, 


126 


WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 


the  dogmas  and  traditions  and  speculations  of  fallible 
men.  We  must  unload  all  these,  and  dump  them  into 
the  mystic  stream  of  Babylon,  and  let  them  forever  dis- 
appear beneath  the  waves  of  dark  oblivion.  The  sects 
of  Christendom  are  all  adrift  because  they  do  not  make 
Christ  the  center  of  unity — because  they  do  not  ' '  keep 
the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace,"  and 
because  they  do  not  strive  to  bring  all  men  "into  the 
unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of 
God,  unto  a  perfect  man,  to  the  measure  of  the  stature 
of  the  fullness  of  Christ";  which  all  lovers  of  the  truth 
should  do,  "that  we  henceforth  be  no  more  children, 
tossed  to  and  fro,  and  carried  about  by  every  wind  of 
doctrine,  by  the  slight  of  men,  and  cunning  craftiness, 
whereby  they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive;  but  speaking  the 
truth  in  love,  may  grow  up  into  him  in  all  things,  which 
is  the  Head,  even  Christ ;  from  whom  the  whole  body, 
fitly  joined  together,  and  compacted  by  the  service  of 
every  joint  [Macknight],  according  to  its  energy,  in  the 
proportion  of  each  particular  part,  effects  the  increase 
of  the  body,  for  the  edification  of  itself  in  love"  (Ephe- 
sians  iv.  14-16). 


THE  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH 
CENTURY. 


Thomas  Campbell  came  from  Scotland  to  the  United 
States  in  May,  1807,  and  his  son  Alexander  landed  in 
New  York,  September  9,  1809.  They  both  settled  in 
Washington  County,  Pennsylvania.  When  Thomas 
Campbell  landed  in  Philadelphia,  he  found  the  Seceder 
Synod  in  session,  and,  upon  presenting  his  credentials, 
he  was  cordially  received,  and  at  once  assigned  by  this 
Synod  to  the  Presbytery  of  Chartiers  in  Western  Penn- 
sylvania, Both  father  and  son  were  educated  from 
childhood  in  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

When  the  Campbells  landed  on  the  shores  of  Amer- 
ica, they  found  the  various  denominations  in  a  deplor- 
able condition,  and  the  Presbyterian  "branches"  were, 
if  anything,  more  powerless,  as  spiritual  agencies,  than 
any  other  "branch  of  the  Church."  All  around,  as 
they  viewed  the  religious  horizon,  and  as  they  gazed 
upon  broken  ranks  of  fiery  zealots,  they  saw  nothing  but 
dissension  and  disunion.  Bigotry,  party  intolerance, 
and  sectarian  selfishness,  were  everywhere  phenomenal 
of  divided  churches  and  of  distracted  members.  Infi- 
delity— gross  infidelity — was  fattening  and  waxing  wan- 
ton on  the  spoils  of  an  inglorious  conquest.  The  aspect 
of  religious  affairs  was  dark  and  gloomy  in  the  extreme. 
The  great  soul  of  Thomas  Campbell  was  moved  within 
him  when  he  saw  that  the  whole  land  was  given  over  to 
the  idolatrous  worship  of  opinions,  speculative  theology, 

(127) 


128    THE  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY. 

scholastic  dogmas  and  men-made  creeds,  and  to  visions 
and  dreams,  and  to  mysticism  and  dreary  superstition. 
He  saw  that  where  there  is  "no  vision  " — no  divine  rev- 
elation— the  "people  perish"  for  want  of  spiritual  food. 
In  the  fearfully  distracted  condition  of  things,  he  saw 
the  immediate  necessity  of  providing  an  antidote,  and 
that  antidote  was  to  be  found  in  pleading  for  Christian 
union,  in  making  an  effort  to  remove  all  barriers,  and  in 
a  determination  to  unite  all  hearts,  if  possible,  upon  the 
Word  of  God,  as  the  only  solvent  of  an  intolerable  evil. 
While  yet  in  Scotland,  the  Campbells,  and  especially 
Thomas  (for  Alexander  was  not  yet  out  of  his  teens), 
were  impressed  with  the  necessity  and  desirability  of 
discussing  Christian  union  by  an  appeal  to  the  Word  of 
God,  and  this  necessity  and  desirability  was  impressed 
upon  his  mind  by  the  "Haldanean  Reformation"  in 
that  country — inaugurated  by  Robert  and  J.  A.  Haldane 
— and  by  reading  the  discussions  of  such  eminent  Inde- 
pendents as  Archibald  McLean,  Alexander  Carson, 
William  Jones,  David  Dale  and  Greville  Ewing.  Simul- 
taneous with  the  movement  of  the  Campbells  in  Wash- 
ington County,  Pennsylvania,  there  was  a  similar 
movement  in  Kentucky,  led  by  a  man  of  pronounced 
abilities.  Barton  W.  Stone,  whose  movement  for  reform 
was  subsequently  absorbed  in  the  stronger  movement 
of  the  Campbells. 

Thomas  Campbell  was  witness  to  the  severe  contest, 
in  the  Old  Country,  between  Presbyterianism  and  Prel- 
acy, and  was  conversant  with  the  history  of  the  Covenant- 
ers, Seceders,  Relief  Church,  Burghers,  Anti-Burghers, 
Old  and  New  Light  Burghers  and  Anti-Burghers — all 
of  which  parties,  in  the  right  of  private  judgment  and 
personal  liberty,  were  trying  to  extricate  themselves 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


129 


from  the  thralldom  of  Romanism,  and  from  the  clutches 
of  a  proud  and  imperious  Prelacy.  There  was  a  pande- 
monium of  sectism  at  the  time  the  Campbells  attempted 
a  reformation  of  the  Seceder  Church,  in  the  Presbytery 
of  Chartiers  ;  the  Bible  was  a  dead  letter  and  inoperative 
among  the  people;  the  consciences  of  church  commu- 
nicants were  fettered  with  Creeds  and  Confessions  of 
Faith ;  the  masses  were  ignorant  of  the  Word  of  God ; 
the  clergy  seemed  to  be  absolutely  ignorant  of  the  rules 
of  Bible  interpretation;  the  various  sects  were  quarrel- 
ing and  fighting  over  party  shibboleths,  and  ungodly 
rivalry  existed  among  the  Protestant  denominations  ; 
a  line  of  distinction  was  clearly  marked  between  the 
"clergy  and  the  laity  "  ;  the  denominations  were  all  lost 
to  the  apostolic  order  of  things. 

The  Seceder  congregations  in  Washington  County 
were  much  pleased  with  the  accession  of  Thomas  Camp- 
bell to  their  ministry,  to  whom  they  became  strongly 
attached.  His  high  order  of  talents  rendered  him  very 
popular  among  the  people.  Soon,  however,  suspicions 
began  to  arise  in  the  minds  of  his  ministerial  brethren 
that  he  was  too  much  disposed  to  relax  the  rigidness  of 
their  ecclesiastical  rules,  and  to  cherish  for  sister  denom- 
inations feelings  of  good  will  and  fraternity  in  which 
they  were  unwilling  to  share.  They  watched  his  move- 
ments with  jaundiced  eyes,  and  avoided  him  with  ill- 
concealed  feelings  of  envy,  because  he  went  among  the 
destitute,  who  had  for  a  long  time  been  deprived  of  the 
ministrations  of  the  gospel,  and  administered  the  Lord's 
Supper  to  other  branches  of  the  Presbyterian  family. 
Mr.  Wilson,  a  young  minister,  at  the  first  meeting  of 
Presbytery,  laid  the  case  before  it  in  the  usual  form  of 
"libel,"  containing  various  formal  and  specified  charges,, 

10 


130    THE  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY. 

the  chief  of  which  were  that  Mr.  Campbell  had  failed  to 
inculcate  strict  adherence  to  the  church  standard  and 
usages,  and  that  he  had  even  expressed  his  disapproval 
of  some  things  contained  in  said  Standard.  Placed 
upon  the  defensive,  he  was  somewhat  guarded  and  con- 
ciliatory in  his  replies.  His  pleadings  in  behalf  of 
Christian  liberty  and  common  fraternity  were  in  vain, 
and  his  appeals  to  the  Bible  were  wholly  disregarded ; 
and  though  he  persisted  that  he  had  violated  no  precept 
of  the  Sacred  Volume,  the  Presbytery  finally  found  him 
deserving  of  censure  for  not  adhering  to  the  "Secession 
Testimony."  Against  this  decision  Thomas  Campbell 
protested,  and  his  case  was,  not  long  afterward,  sub- 
mitted to  the  first  meeting  of  the  Synod.  In  the  mean- 
time, he  was  apprised  of  the  fact  that  many  of  his 
fellow-ministers  had  become  inimical  to  him  through  the 
influence  of  those  who  conducted  the  prosecution  ;  and 
knowing  well  that  it  was  impossible  for  him,  with  his 
views  of  the  Bible,  and  of  the  right  of  private  judgment, 
he  clearly  perceived  that  if  the  Synod  should  sanction 
the  decision  of  the  Presbytery,  he  must  at  once  cease  to 
be  a  minister  in  the  Seceder  branch  of  the  Presbyterian 
family.  Anxious  to  avoid  a  collision  which  might  prove 
detrimental  to  his  usefulness,  and  which  might  excite 
discord  and  alienation,  and  still  cherishing  the  desire  to 
co-operate  with  those  with  whom  he  had  been  so  long 
associated,  he  addressed  an  earnest  appeal  to  the  Synod, 
which  was  to  be  presented  to  that  august  body  at  its 
first  meeting.  The  appeal  was  addressed,  "To  the 
Associate  Synod  of  North  America."  That  the  reader 
may  judge  of  the  animus  of  this  "appeal,"  and  get  an 
idea  of  the  incipient  stages  of  the  great  reformatory 
movement  which,  in  the  course  of  time,  was  destined 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


to  shake  the  whole  religious  world,  we  make  the  follow- 
ing extract : 

It  is,  therefore,  because  I  plead  the  cause  of  scriptural  and  apostolic 
worship  of  the  Church,  in  opposition  to  the  various  errors  and  schisms 
which  have  so  awfully  corrupted  and  divided  it,  that  the  brethren  of 
the  Union  should  feel  it  difficult  to  admit  me  as  their  fellow-laborer 
In  that  blessed  work?  I  sincerely  rejoice  with  them  in  what  they  have 
done  in  that  way;  but  still,  all  is  not  yet  done;  and  surely  they  can 
have  no  objections  to  go  further.  Nor  do  I  presume  to  dictate  to  them 
or  to  others  as  to  how  they  should  proceed  for  the  glorious  })urpose  of 
promoting  the  unity  and  purity  of  the  Church ;  but  only  beg  leave, 
for  my  own  part,  to  walk  upon  such  pure  and  peaceable  ground  that  I 
may  have  nothing  to  do  with  human  controversy  about  the  right  or 
wrong  side  of  any  opinion  whatsoever,  by  simply  acquiescing  in  what 
is  written,  as  quite  sufficient  for  every  purpose  of  faith  and  duty;  and 
thereby  to  influence  as  many  as  possible  to  depart  from  human  contro- 
versy, to  betake  themselves  to  the  Scriptures,  and,  in  so  doing,  to  the 
study  and  practice  of  faith,  holiness  and  love.  And  all  this  without 
any  intention  on  my  part  to  judge  or  despise  my  Christian  brethren 
who  may  not  see  with  my  eyes  in  those  things  which,  to  me,  appear 
indisj)en8ably  necessary  to  promote  and  secure  the  unity,  peace  and 
purity  of  the  Church.  Say,  brethren,  what  is  my  otlense,  that  I 
should  be  thrust  out  from  the  heritage  of  the  Lord,  or  from  serving 
him  in  (hat  good  work  to  which  he  has  been  graciously  pleased  to  call 
me?  For  what  error  or  immorality  ought  I  to  be  rejected,  except  it 
be  that  I  refuse  to  acknowledge  as  obligatory  upon  myself,  or  to  impose 
upon  others,  anything  as  of  divine  obligation  for  which  I  can  not  pro- 
duce a  "Thus  saith  the  Lord  "  This  I  am  sure  I  can  do,  while  I  keep 
by  Ins  own  word  ;  but  not  quite  so  sure  when  I  substitute  my  own 
meaning  or  opinion,  or  that  of  others,  instead  thereof. 

In  the  same  "appeal"  he  says:  "  And  I  hope  it  is 
no  presumption  to  believe  that  saying  and  doing  the 
very  same  things  that  are  said  and  done  before  our  eyes 
on  the  sacred  page,  is  infallibly  right,  as  well  as  all- 
sufficient  for  the  edification  of  the  Church,  whose  duty 
and  perfection  is  to  be  in  all  things  conformed  to  the 
original  standard."  After  the  reading  of  this  protest, 
and  the  hearing  of  the  case  before  the  Synod,  it  was 


132    THE  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY. 

decided  that  "there  were  such  informalities  in  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Presbytery  in  the  trial  of  the  case  as  to 
afford  sufficient  reason  to  the  Synod  to  set  aside  their 
judgment  and  decision,  and  to  release  the  protester 
from  the  censure  inflicted  by  the  Presbytery  " — which 
they  accordingly  did.  After  this,  the  charges  which 
had  been  before  the  Presbytery,  with  all  the  papers 
pertaining  to  the  trial,  were  referred  to  a  committee, 
who  finally  reported  as  follows: 

Upon  the  whole,  the  committee  are  of  opinion  that  Mr.  Campbell's 
answers  to  the  two  first  articles  of  charge  are  so  evasive  and  unsatis- 
factory, and  highly  equivocal  upon  great  and  important  articles  of 
revealed  religion,  as  to  give  ground  to  conclude  that  he  has  expressed 
sentiments  very  different  upon  these  articles,  and  from  the  sentiments 
held  and  professed  by  this  Church,  and  are  sufficient  grounds  to  infer 
censure. 

"From  this  extreme  reluctance  to  separate  from  the 
Seceders,  for  many  of  whom,  both  preachers  and  people, 
he  continued  to  cherish  sentiments  of  Christian  regard, 
Mr.  Campbell  was  induced  to  submit  to  this  decision, 
handing  in  at  the  same  time  a  declaration  'that  his  sub- 
mission should  be  understood  to  mean  no  more,  on  his 
part,  than  an  act  of  deference  to  the  judgment  of  the 
court;  that,  by  so  doing,  he  might  not  give  offense  to 
his  brethren  by  manifesting  a  refractory  spirit.'  After 
this  concession,  Mr.  Campbell  fondly  hoped  that  the 
amicable  relations  formerly  existing  between  him  and 
the  Presbytery  of  Chartiers  would  be  restored,  and  that 
he  would  be  permitted  to  prosecute  his  labors  in  peace. 
In  this,  however,  he  soon  found  himself  mistaken,  and 
discovered,  with  much  regret,  that  the  hostility  of  his 
opponents  had  been  only  intensified  by  the  issue  of  the 
trial,  and  was  more  undisguised  than  ever.  Misrepre- 
sentations and  calumny  were  employed  to  detract  from 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


"his  influence ;  a  constant  watch  was  placed  over  his 
proceedings,  and  he  discovered  that  even  spies  were 
employed  to  attend  his  meetings,  in  order,  if  possible, 
to  obtain  fresh  grounds  of  accusation  against  him." — 
Memoirs  of  A.  Campbell,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  229-30. 

Forbearance,  under  such  circumstances,  finally  ceased 
to  be  a  Christian  virtue,  and,  having  a  thousand  times 
more  reverence  for  the  Word  of  God  than  for  the  selfish 
sectarian  decrees  of  synods  and  presbyteries,  his  self 
respect  compelled  him  to  secede  from  the  Seceders,  and 
xiccordingly  he  presented  to  the  Synod  a  formal  renun- 
ciation of  its  authority,  announcing  that  he  now  aban- 
doned "all  ministerial  connection  "  with  it,  and  would 
hold  himself  thenceforth  "utterly  unaffected  by  its 
decisions."  His  withdrawal  from  the  persecuting  Sece- 
ders produced  no  interruption  in  his  ministerial  labors. 
Continuing  to  advocate  toleration  of  private  judgment 
and  Christian  union  upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible,  the 
people  in  large  numbers  continued  to  follow  him  up, 
and  to  eagerly  listen  to  his  powerful  pleas,  wherever  it 
was  in  his  power  to  hold  meetings — in  school-houses,  in 
maple  groves,  or  in  private  houses.  In  view  of  the 
unsettled  condition  of  religious  affairs,  and  with  a  sin- 
cere desire  to  form  a  union  upon  the  Bible  alone,  he 
proposed  to  the  honest  and  conscientious  persons  of  the 
Presbyterian  congregations  that  a  special  meeting  should 
be  held  in  order  to  an  interchange  of  sentiments  upon 
the  existing  state  of  things,  and  to  give,  if  possible, 
more  distinctness  to  the  movement  in  which  they  had 
thus  far  been  co-operating  without  any  determinate 
arrangement.  Up  to  this  time,  no  separation  from  the 
religious  denominations  had  been  contemplated  —  no 
separate  bond  of  union  had  been  suggested ;  .nor  was 


134   THE  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURV. 

there  the  remotest  allusion  to  the  formation  of  a  new 
religious  party.  On  the  contrary,  Thomas  Campbell 
only  desired  to  abolish  sectism,  and  he  labored  to  induce 
the  different  religious  denominations  to  unite  upon  the 
Bible  as  the  only  authorized  rule  of  faith  and  practice. 
His  heart  sickened  at  the  sight  of  partyism,  and  he 
urged,  with  all  the  energy  of  his  great  intellect,  that  all 
religious  parties  should  desist  from  shameful  controver- 
sies about  matters  of  mere  opinion  and  expediency. 
Having  separated  himself  from  the  Seceder  branch,  Mr. 
Campbell  was  soon  surrounded  by  a  large  number  of 
godly  and  intelligent  persons,  who,  like  himself,  were 
disheartened  with  the  evils  growing  out  of  sectarian 
envy  and  rivalry,  and  who  were  willing  to  unite  with 
him  in  an  effort  to  make  the  Word  of  God  the  final 
appeal. 


ATTEMPTS  AT  REFORMATION. 


In  our  last  chapter  we  made  reference  to  a  meeting 
called  by  Thomas  Campbell,  the  specific  object  of 
which  was  to  determine  the  course  to  be  pursued  by 
those  who  had  separated  themselves  from  the  trammels 
of  ecclesiasticism  and  from  the  domination  of  a  persecu- 
ting Presbyterian  priesthood,  and  from  the  deliberations 
of  which  meeting  we  date  the  origin  of  the  plea  for  a 
return  to  apostolic  teaching  and  practice.  It  is  our 
purpose  to  acquaint  our  readers  with  the  facts  which 
gave  rise  to  the  reformatory  movement  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  and  to  furnish  the  reasons  of  separation  from 
all  the  ecclesiastical  establishments  of  modern  times. 
We  have  already  traced  out  the  origin  of  the  Protestant 
sects,  the  origin  of  Protestant  creedism,  and  have  con- 
nectedly shown  how  one  sect  has  grown  out  of  another 
sect,  and  how  one  creed  has  succeeded  another  creed. 
When  Thomas  Campbell  began  his  Reformation,  or 
when  he  first  made  his  attempt  to  reform  the  Seceder 
Church,  in  which  he  held  membership,  he  found  the 
religious  world  in  universal  chaos.  He  saw  no  way  out 
of  this  chaos,  and  discovered  no  basis  of  Christian 
union,  except  in  the  abandonment  of  all  creedism,  and 
in  a  complete  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of 
things. 

The  time  for  solemn  consultation  had  arrived.  There 
was  a  large  assembly  of  interested  people,  all  of  whom 
seemed  to  feel  the  importance  of  the  occasion,  and  to 

(135) 


136 


ATTEMPTS  AT  REFORMATION. 


realize  the  responsibilities  of  their  new  religious  atti- 
tude. A  deep  feeling  of  solemnity  pervaded  the 
assembly.  The  divine  guidance  was  invoked,  every 
heart  seemed  to  be  filled  with  prayerful  solicitude,  and 
all  seemed  to  seek  for  that  wisdom  which  comes  from 
above.  Thomas  Campbell  rehearsed  the  great  question 
I  from  the  beginning.  With  unusual  force  he  deplored 
the  shameful  existence  of  religious  divisions,  and  mourned 
the  desolations  of  Zion,  and  deprecated  the  ungodly 
rivalries  of  fighting  sects.  He  called  attention  to  the 
Word  of  God  as  the  infallible  standard  of  spiritual 
truth,  and  as  an  all-sufficient  guide  in  the  Christian  life, 
and  as  furnishing  the  only  basis  of  Christian  union  and 
co  operation.  He  alluded  to  the  departures  that  had 
been  taken  from  the  Sacred  Volume,  and  how  evil- 
minded  men  had  substituted  theories,  speculations,  opin- 
ions and  human  dogmas  for  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel 
of  Christ,  and  how  the  Bible  was  set  aside  to  make 
room  for  philosophical  abstractions,  and  for  all  sorts  of 
fancies  and  conceits.  As  the  only  means  of  removing 
all  these  evils,  he  insisted  with  great  earnestness  upon  a 
radical  return  to  the  simple  teachings  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  for  an  entire  rejection  of  ever>-thing  in 
the  Christian  world  for  which  there  could  not  be  pro- 
duced a  divine  warrant.  Finally,  after  thoroughly 
reviewing  the  premises  which  he  and  his  friends  occu- 
pied in  the  proposed  reformation,  he  proceeded  to 
announce,  in  the  most  simple  and  emphatic  terms,  the 
great  regulating  principle  or  rule  which  was  intended  to 
be  the  accepted  guide  of  their  future  actions.  ' '  That 
rule,  my  highly  respected  hearers,"  said  he  in  conclu- 
sion, '  ■  is  this :  That  where  the  Scriptures  speak,  we 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


SPEAK  ;  AND  WHERE  THE  SCRIPTURES  ARE  SILENT,  WE  ARE 
SILENT." 

Upon  the  enunciation  of  this  supreme  rule  of  action, 
a  solemn  silence  pervaded  the  assembly,  and  thrilled 
with  strange  emotions  every  heart.  They  saw  at  a 
glance  the  vexatious  problem  solved,  and  in  a  manner 
so  simple  and  rudimental  that  it  appeared  to  them  like 
a  new  revelation.  Here  now,  at  length,  was  an  end  put 
to  all  their  doubts.  The  path  of  duty  was  now  made 
clear.  Here  was  the  solvent  of  all  religious  strife. 
Encouragement  seized  every  heart,  and  joy  lighted  up 
every  eye,  because,  from  henceforth,  they  were  to  take 
God  at  his  word,  and  from  this  time  forth  they  were  to 
rely  exclusively  upon  apostolic  precept  and  example. 
All  religious  teaching  which  consisted  in  remote  infer- 
ences, fanciful  interpretations,  speculative  theories,  and 
in  false  rules  of  interpretation,  was  forever  to  be  dis- 
carded—  a  consummation  never  attempted  either  by 
Luther,  Zwingle,  Calvin,  Wesley,  or  by  any  other  Prot- 
estant reformer.  Whatever  private  opinions  men  might 
entertain  in  regard  to  matters  not  clearly  revealed  must 
be  reserved  as  private  property,  and  must  not  be 
imposed  on  any  one  as  a  test  of  loyalty  and  Christian 
fraternity.  The  silence  of  the  Bible  must  be  respected 
equally  with  its  positive  and  unquestioned  revelations, 
which,  by  divine  authority,  were  declared  to  be  able  to 
"make  the  man  of  God  perfect,  and  thoroughly  fur- 
nished unto  every  good  work." 

After  Mr.  Campbell  finished  his  remarkable  address, 
he  called  upon  those  present  for  a  free  and  candid 
expression  of  their  views.  After  an  interval  of  some 
considerable  time,  the  dead  silence  was  broken  by  a 
shrewd  Scotch  Seceder,  Andrew  Munro,  a  bookseller 


138 


ATTEMPTS  AT  REFORMATION. 


and  postmaster  at  Canonsburg,  who  arose  and  a^id  ; 
"Mr.  Campbell,  if  we  adopt  that  as  a  basis,  then  tliere 
is  an  end  of  infant  baptism."  This  remark  produced 
a  profound  sensation.  "'Of  course,"  remarked  Mr. 
Campbell,  "  if  infant  baptism  be  not  found  in  Scripture, 
we  can  have  nothing  to  do  with  it. "  Upon  this,  Thomas 
Acheson,  of  Washington,  arose,  greatly  e.xcited,  and, 
advancing  a  short  distance,  exclaimed,  laying  his  hand 
upon  his  heart:  "I  hope  I  may  never  see  the  day  when 
my  heart  will  renounce  that  blessed  saying  of  the  Scrip- 
ture, '  Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto  me.  and  forbid 
them  not;  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'"' 
Upon  saying  this  he  was  so  much  affected  that  he  burst 
into  tears,  and  while  a  deep,  sympathetic  feeling  per- 
vaded the  entire  assembly,  he  was  about  to  retire  to  an 
adjoining  room,  when  James  Foster,  not  willing  that 
this  misapplication  of  Scripture  should  pass  unchal- 
lenged, cried  out:  "Mr.  Acheson,  I  would  remark  that 
in  the  portion  of  Scripture  you  have  quoted,  tlure  is  no 
refere?ue  whatever  to  infant  baptis?n."  Without  offering 
a  reply,  ]SIr.  Acheson  passed  out  to  weep  alone;  ''but 
this  incident,"  says  Professor  Richardson,  in  his  Memoirs 
cf  Alexander  Campbell^  ' '  while  it  foreshadowed  some  of 
the  trials  which  the  future  had  in  store,  failed  to  abate, 
in  the  least,  the  confidence  which  the  majority  of  those 
present  placed  in  the  principles  to  which  they  were 
committed.  The  rule  which  Mr.  Campbell  had 
announced  seemed  to  cover  the  whole  ground,  and  to 
be  so  ob\'iously  just  and  proper,  that  after  further  dis- 
cussion and  conference,  it  was  adopted  with  apparent 
unanimity,  no  valid  objections  being  urged  against  it." 


THE  WORD  OF  GOD  THE  SOLE  RULE  OF 
ACTION. 


The  rule  of  action  adopted  in  that  humble  and 
obscure  meeting  was  destined  to  revolutionize  the  relig- 
ious world.  ' '  Where  tlie  Scriptures  speak,  we  speak ; 
where  these  are  silent,  we  are  silent,"  is  a  sentiment  that 
not  only  reaches  back  to  the  days  of  the  apostles,  but 
one  which  reaches  into  the  far  future  with  consequences 
of  good  to  the  world  that  are  beyond  all  human  estimate. 
For  the  purpose  of  promoting  Christian  union  and  jjro- 
ducing  peace  in  the  religious  world,  and  in  order  to 
carry  out  this  purpose  more  effectively,  it  was  resolved, 
at  a  meeting  held  on  the  headwaters  of  Buffalo  Creek, 
August  17,  1809,  that  this  little  party  of  reformers 
would  form  themselves  into  a  regular  association,  to  be 
known  as  "The  Christian  Association  of  Washington." 
They  then  appointed  twenty-one  of  their  number  to 
meet  and  confer  together,  and,  with  the  counsel  of 
Thomas  Campbell,  to  determine  the  proper  method  by 
which  to  consummate  the  object  of  the  Association. 
Mr.  Campbell  prepared  his  Declaration  and  Address, 
the  object  of  which  was  not  to  formulate  a  new  creed, 
but  to  set  forth  in  a  perspicuous  and  forcible  manner 
the  object  of  the  movement  in  which  he  and  those  asso- 
ciated with  him  were  enlisted.  At  a  called  and  special 
meeting  he  read  the  document  in  the  presence  of  his 
brethren,  that  it  might  be  approved  and  adopted  by 
them.    Having  been  unanimously  adopted  as  an  expo- 

(139) 


J40      THK  WORD  OK  GOD  THE  SOLE  RULE  OF  ACTION. 


nent  of  their  pronounced  principles,  it  was  at  once 
.ordered  to  be  printed,  which  was  done  September  7, 
1809.  We  quote  as  follows  from  this  '■'Declaration"  ; 
of  the  far-reaching  consequences  of  the  principles  which 
the  document  contained,  neither  Thomas  Campbell  nor 
his  associates  had  a  full  conception : 

Our  desire,  therefore,  for  ourselves  and  our  brethren  would  be,  that, 
rejecting  human  opinions  and  the  inventions  of  men,  as  of  any  author- 
ity, or  as  having  any  place  in  the  Church  of  God,  we  might  forever 
(■case  from  further  contentions  about  such  things,  returning  to  and 
luilding  fast  by  the  original  standard,  taking  the  Divine  Word  alone 
/or  our  rule,  the  Holy  Spirit  for  our  teacher  and  guide  to  lead  us  into 
.all  truth,  and  Christ  alone  as  exhibited  in  the  Word  for  our  salvation  ; 
and  that  by  so  doing  we  may  be  at  peace  among  ourselves,  follow 
peace  with  all  men,  and  holiness,  without  which  no  man  shall  see  the 
Lord.    Impressed  with  these  sentiments,  we  have  resolved  as  follows  : 

"  I.  That  we  form  ourselves  into  a  religious  association,  under  the 
denomination  of  "The  Christian  Association  of  Washington,"  for  the 
sole  purpose  of  promoting  simple,  evangelical  Christianity,  free  from 
all  mixture  of  human  opinions  and  inventions  of  men. 

"  II.  That  each  member,  according  to  his  ability,  cheerfully  and 
liberally  subscribe  a  specified  sum,  to  be  paid  half-yearly,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  raising  a  fund  to  support  a  pure  gospel  ministry,  that  shall 
reduce  to  practice  that  whole  form  of  doctrine,  worship,  discipline  and 
government  expressly  revealed  and  enjoined  in  the  Word  of  God ; 
and  also  for  supplying  the  poor  with  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

"III.  That  this  Society  consider  it  a  duty,  and  shall  use  all  proper 
means  within  its  power,  to  encourage  the  formation  of  similar  associa- 
tions ;  and  shall,  for  this  purpose,  hold  itself  in  readiness,  upon  appli- 
cation, to  correspond  with  and  render  all  possible  assistance  to  such  as 
piay  desire  to  associate  for  the  same  desirable  and  important  purposes. 

"  IV.  That  this  Society  by  no  means  considers  itself  a  Church,  nor 
does  at  all  assume  to  itself  the  powers  peculiar  to  such  a  society  ;  nor 
do  the  members,  as  such,  consider  themselves  as  standing  connected  in 
that  relation  ;  nor  as  at  all  associated  for  the  peculiar  purposes  of 
Church  association,  but  merely  as  voluntary  advocates  for  Church 
jreformation,  and  as  possessing  the  powers  common  to  all  individuals 
who  may  please  to  associate,  in  a  peaceful  and  orderly  mannar,  for 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


anj  lawful  purpose — namely,  the  dieposal  of  their  time,  rounsel  and 
property,  as  they  may  see  cause. 

"V.  That  this  Society,  formed  for  the  sole  purpose  of  promoting 
simple,  evangelical  Christianity,  shall  to  the  utmost  of  iis  power, 
countenance  and  support  such  ministers,  and  such  only,  as  exhibit  a 
ttiamfest  conformity  to  the  original  standard,  in  conversation  and  doc- 
trine, in  zeal  and  diligence  ;  only  sucli  as  reduce  to  practice  that 
simple,  original  form  of  Christianity  expressly  exhibited  upon  the 
Sacred  Page,  without  attempting  to  inculcate  anything  of  human 
authority,  of  private  opinion,  or  inventions  of  men,  as  having  place  in 
the  constitution,  faith  or  worship  of  the  Christian  Church,  or  anything 
as  matter  of  Christian  faith  or  duty,  for  which  there  can  not  be 
expressly  produced  a  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord ! '  either  in  express  terms 
or  by  approved  precedent." 

By  the  wording  of  the  foregoing  statement  of  prin- 
ciples it  will  be  seen  that  the  Association  did  not  at  all 
regard  itself  as  a  Church,  or  publish  these  statements  as 
the  articles  of  a  creed,  but  simply  to  publish  to  the 
world  their  desire  to  urge  "a  pure  evangelical  reforma- 
tion, by  the  simple  preaching  of  the  gospel,  and  the 
administration  of  its  ordinances  in  exact  conformity  to 
the  divine  standard."  Thomas  Campbell  wrote  his 
Declaration  and  Address  in  the  very  midst  of  a  paradise 
of  religious  partyism,  and  while  sectarian  rancor  and 
hatred  and  jealousy  were  consuming  what  little  piety 
and  spirituality  were  left  in  the  country.  "  Each  party 
strove  for  supremacy,  and  maintained  its  peculiarities 
with  a  zeal  as  ardent  and  persecuting  as  the  laws  of  the 
land  and  the  usages  of  society  would  permit.  The  dis- 
tinguishing tenets  of  each  party  were  constantly  thun- 
dered from  every  pulpit,  and  any  departure  from  the 
'  traditions  of  the  elders '  was  visited  at  once  with  the 
severest  ecclesiastical  censure.  Covenanting,  church 
politics,  church  psalmody,  hyper-Calvinistic  questions, 
were  the  great  topics  of  the  day ;  and  such  was  the 


142     THE  WORD  OF  GOD  THE  SOLE  RULE  OF  ACTION. 


rigid,  uncompromising  spirit  prevailing,  that  the  most 
trivial  things  would  produce  a  schism,  so  that  old  mem- 
bers were  known  to  break  off  from  their  congregations 
simply  because  the  clerk  presumed  to  give  out  before 
singing  tivo  lines  of  a  psalm  instead  of  one,  as  had  been 
the  usual  custom.  Against  this  slavish  subjection  to 
custom,  and  to  opinjons  and  regulations  that  were 
merely  of  human  origin,  Mr.  Campbell  had  long  felt  it 
his  duty  to  protest ;  and  knowing  no  remedy  for  the  sad 
condition  of  things  existing,  except  in  a  simple  return 
to  the  plain  teachings  of  the  Bible,  as  alone  authorita- 
tive and  binding  upon  the  consience,  he  and  those 
associated  with  him  felt  it  incumbent  upon  them  to  urge 
this  upon  religious  society.  This  they  endeavored  to 
do  in  the  spirit  of  moderation  and  Christian  love,  hop- 
ing that  the  overture  would  be  accepted  by  the  religious 
communities  around,  especially  by  those  of  the  Presby- 
terian order,  whose  differences  were,  in  themselves,  so 
trivial."  —  Memoirs  of  Alexander  Campbell^  Vol.  /. , 
/.  245. 

This,  in  brief,  was  the  religious  complexion  of  things 
when  Alexander  Campbell  appeared  upon  the  stage  of 
action,  who  in  the  providence  of  God  was  destined  to 
become  the  chosen  and  distinguished  promulgator  of 
the  reformatory  principles  enunciated  by  his  illustrious 
father.  Up  to  the  period  when  Alexander  Campbell 
comes  to  the  front,  Thomas  Campbell  is  still  a  Presby- 
terian in  faith,  but  a  free  and  independent  thinker. 
While  advocating  Christian  union  upon  the  basis  of  the 
Bible,  he  still  continues  to  baptize  infants.  He  still 
continues  to  be  trammeled  by  the  dogmas  of  Calvinism, 
and  to  struggle  in  the  meshes  of  ecclesiasticism.  but. 
having  placed  himself  upon  the  solid  ground  of  honest 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Bible  exegesis,  and  having  adopted  an  infallible  rule  of 
Scripture  interpretation,  we  shall  soon  see  how  his  prin- 
ciple drove  him,  and  his  Presbyterian  son,  A'r^xander, 
back  upon  apostolic  ground,  and  hew  the  God  of  truth 
guided  their  feet  in  a  way  they  knew  not. 


ATTEMPTS  AT  CHRISTIAN  UNION. 


While  Alexander  Campbell  was  reading  the  proof 
sheets  of  the  "Declaration,"  in  1809,  soon  after  his 
arrival  in  Washington  from  Scotland,  he  observed  to 
his  father :  ' '  Then,  sir,  you  must  abandon  and  give  up 
infant  baptism,  and  some  other  practices  for  which  it 
seems  to  me  you  can  not  produce  an  express  precept  or 
an  example  in  any  book  of  the  Christian  Scriptures." 
To  which,  after  some  hesitancy,  the  father  responded : 
"'To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony'  we  make  our 
appeal.  If  not  found  therein,  we,  of  course,  must 
abandon  it."  Then,  as  showing  the  perplexed  condi- 
tion of  his  mind,  he  added:  "We  could  not  unchurch 
ourselves  now,  and  go  out  into  the  world,  and  then  turn 
back  again  and  enter  the  Church  merely  for  the  sake 
of  form  and  decorum."  When,  in  an  accidental  con- 
versation with  Rev.  Mr.  Riddle,  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  Union,  the  principles  of  the  "  Declaration  and 
Address  "  were  introduced  as  matters  of  discussion,  Mr. 
Alexander  referred  to  the  proposition  that  "  nothing 
should  be  required  as  a  matter  of  faith  or  duty  for  which 
a  'Thus  saith  the  Lord'  could  not  be  produced,  either 
in  express  terms  or  by  approved  precedent."  "Sir," 
said  Mr.  Riddle,  "these  words,  however  plausible  in 
appearance,  are  not  sound.  For  if  you  follow  these 
out,  you  must  become  a  Baptist."  "Why,  sir,"  said 
the  young  Alexander,  "is  there  in  the  Scriptures  no 
express  precept  nor  precedent  for  infant  baptism  ? " 

(144) 


KEI-ORMATORV  MOVEMENTS. 


The  youthful  inquirer  was  startled  and  chagrined  that 
he  could  not  produce  one  ;  and  forthwith  he  appealed  to 
Andrew  Munro,  the  principal  bookseller  in  Canonsburg, 
to  furnish  him  all  the  treatises  at  his  command  in  favor 
of  infant  baptism.  He  inquired  for  no  works  on  the 
other  side  of  the  question,  for  at  this  time  he  had  little 
or  no  acquaintance  with  the  Baptists,  and  regarded 
them  as  a  people  comparatively  ignorant  and  unedu- 
cated. He  was  thrown  into  a  state  of  doubt  and  per- 
plexity by  pondering  this  law  of  scriptural  exegesis  as 
previously  announced  by  his  father:  "We  make  our 
appeal  to  the  law  and  to  the  testimony.  Whatever  is 
not  found  therein,  we,  of  course,  must  abandon."  He 
read  the  pedobaptist  authorities  in  ardent  hopes  of  for- 
tifying his  mind  in  favor  of  infant  baptism.  The  more 
he  investigated,  the  more  his  prejudices  and  predilec- 
tions gave  way,  and  the  conviction  gradually  grew  upon 
him  that  infant  baptism  was  a  human  device.  Thor- 
oughly disgusted  with  the  bald  assumptions  and  fallacious 
reasonings  of  the  pedobaptist  authorities,  he  threw  them 
all  aside,  and  fled  hopefully  to  the  Greek  New  Testa- 
ment in  the  fond  expectation  of  finding  convincing 
proof  of  the  validity  of  infant  baptism  in  the  fountain- 
head.  But  the  plainness  of  the  Greek  text  only  served 
to  strengthen  his  doubts.  And  when  again  he  entered 
into  a  conversation  with  his  father  on  this  vexed  ques- 
tion, he  found  him  entirely  willing  to  admit  that  there 
were  neither  "express  terms"  nor  "precedent"  to 
authorize  the  practice.  "But,"  said  he,  "  as  for  those 
who  are  already  members  of  the  Church  and  partici- 
pants of  the  Lord's  Supper,  I  can  see  no  propriety, 
even  if  the  scriptural  evidence  for  infant  baptism  be 
found  deficient,  in  their  unchurching  or  paganizing; 
II 


146 


ATTEMPTS  AT  CHRISTIAN 


UNION. 


themselves,  or  in  putting  off  Christ,  merely  for  the 
sake  of  making  a  new  profession  ;  and  thus  going  out 
of  the  Church  merely  for  the  sake  of  coming  in  again." 

By  these  continued  discussions  it  will  be  perceived 
that  a  serious  conflict  was  going  on  in  the  minds  of  these 
two  men,  and  especially  in  the  mind  of  the  son,  as  to 
the  question  whether  it  were  better,  all  things  consid- 
ered, to  adhere  to  Presbyterian  usages  and  to  the 
"traditions  of  the  fathers,"  or,  enlightened  by  the  Word 
of  God,  carry  out  the  logic  of  their  own  rules  of  Bible 
interpretation.  Being  thoroughly  honest  men,  and 
seeking  only  to  know  the  truth,  and,  above  all,  desiring 
to  effect  Christian  union  exclusively  upon  the  basis  of 
the  Bible,  they  determined  to  take  the  Word  of  God  as 
their  sole  and  infallible  guide.  The  "  Declaration  and 
Address"  contains  the  following  sentiments,  as  illustra- 
tive of  the  religious  condition  of  things  then  existing: 

AVhat  dreary  effects  of  those  accursed  divisions  are  to  be  seen,  ewen 
in  this  highly  favored  country,  where  the  sword  of  the  civil  magistrate 
has  not  yet  learned  to  serve  at  the  altar  !  Have  we  not  seen  congrega- 
tions broken  to  pieces,  neighborhoods  of  professing  Christians  first 
thrown  into  confusion  by  party  contentions,  and,  in  the  end,  entirely 
deprived  of  gospel  ordinances  ;  while,  in  the  meanwhile,  large  settle- 
ments and  tracts  of  country  remain  to  this  day  destitute  of  a  gospel 
ministry,  many  of  them  in  little  better  than  a  state  of  heathenism,  the 
churches  being  either  so  weakened  by  divisions  that  they  can  not  send 
them  ministers,  or  the  people  so  divided  among  themselves  that  they 
will  not  receive  them  ?  Several,  at  the  same  time,  who  live  at  the 
door  of  a  preached  gospel,  dare  not  in  conscience  go  to  hear  it,  and, 
of  course,  enjoy  little  more  advantage  in  that  respect  than  living  in 
the  midst  of  heathen. 

Not  discouraged  by  the  small  progress  made  toward 
Christian  union,  and  not  dismayed  by  the  powerful 
opposition  he  encountered  from  his  former  Presbyterian 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


brethren,  he  thus,  from  time  to  time,  addresses  his  little 
band  : 

Dearly  beloved  brethren,  why  should  we  deem  it  a  thing  incredible 
that  the  Church  of  Christ,  in  this  highly  favored  country,  shouk! 
resume  that  original  unity,  peace  and  purity  which  belong  to  its  con- 
stitution and  constitute  its  glory?  Or  is  there  anything  that  can  be 
justly  deemed  necessary  for  this  desirable  purpose  but  to  conform  to 
the  model  and  adopt  the  practice  of  the  primitive  Church,  expressly 
exhibited  in  the  New  Testament  ?  Whatever  alterations  this  might 
produce  in  any  or  in  all  of  the  churches,  should,  we  think,  neither  be 
deemed  inadmissible  nor  ineligible.  Surely  such  alteration  would  be 
every  way  for  the  better  and  not  for  the  worse,  unless  we  should  sup- 
pose the  divinely-inspired  rule  to  be  faulty  or  defective.  Were  we, 
then,  in  our  church  constitution  and  management,  to  exhibit  a  com- 
plete conformity  to  the  apostolic  Church,  would  we  not  be  in  that 
respect  as  perfect  as  Christ  intended  us  to  be  ?  And  should  not  thii 
suffice  us  ? 


FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES. 


Just  before  submitting  his  thirteen  propositions  to 
his  brethren  and  to  the  religious  world,  with  a  view  of 
drawing  the  people  away  from  strife  and  contention, 
and  in  order  to  fix  their  minds  upon  the  liberty  of  the 
gospel  with  which  Christ  makes  all  willing  men  free,  he 
says:  "  Let  us  not  imagine  that  the  subjoined  proposi- 
tions are  at  all  intended  as  an  overture  toward  a  new- 
creed  or  standard  for  the  Church,  or  as  in  any  way 
designed  to  be  made  a  term  of  communion ;  nothing 
can  be  further  from  our  intention.  They  are  merely 
designed  to  open  up  the  way,  that  we  may  come  fairly 
and  firmly  to  original  ground  upon  clear  and  certain 
premises,  and  take  up  things  just  as  the  apostles  left 
them ;  and  thus,  disentangled  from  the  accruing  embar- 
rassments of  intervening  ages,  we  may  stand  with  evi- 
dence upon  the  same  ground  on  which  the  Church  stood 
at  the  beginning." 

Here  indeed  was  the  beginning  of  radical  work.  Here 
was  a  proposition  to  pass  back  over  all  human  author- 
ities, over  all  the  traditions  and  false  dogmas  of  "inter- 
vening ages,"  and  begin  a  thorough  restoration  of  the 
ancient  order  of  things.  Neither  Luther  nor  any  one 
else  since  his  day  ever  attempted  such  a  revolution. 
Thomas  Campbell  proposed  to  set  aside  the  decrees  of 
popes,  councils,  synods,  conferences  and  general  assem- 
blies, and  to  ignore  all  the  traditions  and  corrupt  prac- 
tices of  an  apostate  Church,  and  to  build  upon  Christ 

(148) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


149 


alone.  Here  was  an  invitation  to  come  directly  to  the 
primitive  model — to  return  to  pristine  purity  and  perfec- 
tion— and,  consentaneous  with  that  act,  the  rejection  of 
all  human  innovations,  and  the  repudiation  of  all  human 
authority.  It  seems  as  though  God  guided  and  guarded 
the  hand  that  penned  such  grand  and  startling  proposi- 
tions. 

What  a  mighty  revolution  have  these  propositions 
wrought  within  the  last  half  century.  The  thoughts 
contained  in  these  propositions  have  changed  and  modi- 
fied the  theology  of  the  entire  religious  world,  have 
influenced  every  pulpit,  have  changed  the  tone  of  every 
religious  journal,  and  still  continue  to  challenge  investi- 
gation. As  the  propositions  referred  to  are  not  access- 
ible to  many  of  our  readers,  we  think  we  are  rendering 
valuable  service  by  reproducing  several,  if  not  all,  of 
them  in  this  connection. 

Proposition  1.  That  the  Church  of  Christ  upon  earth  is  essentially, 
intentionally  and  constitutionally  one  ;  consisting  of  all  those  in  every 
place  that  profess  their  faith  in  Christ  and  obedience  to  him  in  all 
things  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  that  manifest  the  same  by  their 
tempers  and  conduct ;  and  none  else,  as  none  else  can  be  truly  and 
properly  called  Christians. 

2.  That,  although  the  Church  of  Christ  upon  earth  must  necessarily 
exist  in  particular  and  distinct  societies,  locally  separate  one  from  the 
other,  yet  there  ought  to  be  no  schisms,  no  uncharitable  diviBions 
among  them.  They  ought  to  receive  each  other,  as  Jesus  Christ  hath 
also  received  them,  to  the  glory  of  God.  And,  for  this  purpose,  they 
i>ught  all  to  walk  by  the  same  rule  ;  to  mind  and  speak  the  same  things,  and 
to  be  perfectly  joined  together  in  the  same  mind  and  in  the  same 
judgment. 

3.  That,  in  order  to  this,  nothing  ought  to  be  inculcated  upon 
Christians  as  articles  of  faith,  nor  required  of  them  as  terms  of  com- 
munion, but  what  is  expressly  taught  and  enjoined  upon  them  in  the  Word 
of  God.  Nor  ought  anything  to  be  admitted  as  of  divine  obligation  in 
Iheir  Church  constitution  and  managements,  but  what  is  expressly 


FUNDAMENTAL  PKIKCIFLES. 


mjointd  by  the  aiithority  of  ovr  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  his  apofltlea  upon 
the  New  Testament  Church,  either  in  express  terms  or  by  approved  pre- 
cedent. 

4.  That,  although  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are  inseparably 
connected,  making  together  but  one  perfect  and  entire  revelatioii  of 
the  divine  will  for  the  edification  and  salvation  of  the  Church,  and, 
therefore,  in  that  respect  can  not  be  separated  ;  yet,  as  to  what  directly 
and  properly  belongs  to  their  immediate  object,  the  New  Teglamenl  is  as 
perfect  a  constitution  for  the  worship,  discipline  and  government  of  the  New 
Testament  Church,  and  as  perfect  a  rule  for  the  particular  duties  of  its 
members,  as  the  Old  Testament  was  for  the  worship,  discipline  and 
government  of  the  Old  Testament  Church  and  the  particular  duties  of 
its  members. 

5.  That  with  respect  to  commands  and  ordinances  of  oar  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  where  the  Scriptures  are  silent  as  to  the  express  time  or 
manner  of  performance,  if  any  such  there  be,  no  huTnan  authority  has 
power  to  interfere  in  order  to  supply  the  supposed  deficiency  by  maJein^  laws 
for  the  Church,  nor  can  anything  more  be  required  of  Christians  in  such 
cases  but  only  that  they  so  observe  these  commands  and  ordinances  as 
will  evidently  answer  the  declared  and  obvious  ends  of  their  institu- 
tion. Much  less  has  any  human  authority  power  to  impose  new  com- 
mands or  ordinauces  upon  the  Church,  which  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
has  not  enjoined.  Nothing  ought  to  be  received  into  the  faith  or  worship 
of  the  Church,  or  be  made  a  term  of  communion  among  Christians, 
that  is  not  as  old  as  the  New  Testament. 

6.  That  although  inferences  and  deductions  from  Scripture  prem- 
ises, when  fairly  inferred,  may  be  truly  called  the  doctrine  of  God's 
Holy  Word,  yet  are  they  not  formally  binding  upon  the  cooaciences  of 
Christians  further  than  they  perceive  the  connection,  and  evidently 
see  they  are  so,  for  their  faith  must  not  stand  in  the  wisdom  of  men, 
but  in  the  power  and  veracity  of  God.  Therefore  no  such  deductions 
can  be  made  terms  of  communion,  but  do  properly  belong  to  the  after 
and  progressive  edification  of  the  Church.  Hence,  it  is  evident  that 
no  such  deductions  or  inferential  truths  ought  to  have  any  place  in  the 
Church's  Confession. 

Proposition  1 2  reads  as  follows : 

That  all  that  is  necessary  to  the  highest  state  of  perfection  and  purity 
of  the  Church  upon  earth  is,  first,  that  none  be  received  as  members 
but  such  as,  having  that  due  measure  of  scriptural  self-knowledgfl 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


described  above,  do  profess  their  faith  in  Christ  and  obedience  to  him 
in  all  things  according  to  the  Scriptures ;  nor,  secondly,  that  any  be 
retained  in  her  communion  longer  than  they  continue  to  manifest  the 
reality  of  their  profession  by  temper  and  conduct.  Tliirdly,  that  her 
ministers,  duly  and  scripturally  qualified,  inculcate  none  other  things 
than  those  very  articles  of  faith  and  holiness  expressly  revealed  and 
enjoined  in  the  Word  of  God.  Lastly,  that  in  all  their  administrations 
they  keep  close  by  the  observance  of  all  divine  ordinances,  after  the 
example  of  tJie  primitive  Church,  exhibited  in  the  New  Testament,  without  any 
additions  whatsoever  of  human  opinions  w  inventions  of  men. 

We  have  italicized  certain  phrases  in  these  proposi- 
tions, in  order  to  enlist  the  special  attention  of  our  read- 
ers. The  sentiments  contained  in  these  propositions 
are  the  sentiments  that  we  have  persistently  urged  in 
the  past.  These  sublime  statements  constitute  no 
creed,  but  they  simply  indicate  the  fixed  purpose  of  the 
author,  which  is  also  our  fixed  purpose,  viz.:  the  com- 
plete restoration  of  the  primitive  order  of  things,  in 
commands,  precepts,  ordinances,  worship  and  discipline. 


THE  RESTORATION. 


In  defending  his  thirteen  propositions  against  the 
heated  assaults  of  his  Presbyterian  ministerial  brethren, 
who  tried  in  every  possible  way  to  inveigle  him  in  self- 
contradictions  and  inconsistencies,  Thomas  Campbell 
sought  to  draw  a  distinction  between  faith  and  opinion, 
between  an  express  scriptural  declaration  and  inferences 
which  may  be  deduced  from  it.  By  the  latter  were 
meant  such  conclusions  as  were  not  necessarily  involved 
in  the  Scripture  premises,  and  which  were  to  be  regarded 
as  private  opinions,  and  not  to  be  made  a  rule  of  faith 
or  duty  to  any  one.  In  order  to  obtain  the  true  mean- 
ing of  Scripture,  "the  whole  revelation  was  to  be  taken 
together,  or  in  its  due  connection  upon  every  article, 
and  not  on  any  detached  sentence."  If,  in  consequence 
of  thus  allowing  full  freedom  of  opinion,  any  should 
bring  forward  the  charge  of  latitudinarianism,  they  are 
requested  to  consider  whether  this  charge  does  not  lie 
against  those  who  add  their  opinions  to  the  Word  of 
God,  rather  than  against  those  who  insist  upon  return- 
ing to  the  profession  and  practice  of  the  primitive 
Church.  A  return  to  the  Bible,  he  insisted,  was  the 
only  way  to  get  rid  of  existing  sectarian  evils.  He  goes 
1^  on  to  say  that  "a  manifest  attachment  to  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  in  faith,  holiness  and  charity,  was  the  original 
criterion  of  Christian  character  —  the  distinguishing 
badge  of  our  holy  profession  —  the  foundation  and 
cement  of  Christian  unity.    But  now,  alas!  and  long 

('52) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


since,  an  external  name,  a  mere  educational  formality 
of  sameness  in  the  profession  of  a  certain  standard  or 
formula  of  human  fabric,  with  a  very  moderate  degree 
of  what  is  called  morality,  forms  the  bond  and  founda- 
tion, the  root  and  reason  of  ecclesiastical  unity. "  Thomas 
Campbell  speaks  like  an  oracle,  as  he  continues  his 
arraignment  of  the  hypocritical  clergy  of  his  day,  of 
whom  we  find  a  counterpart  in  the  present  day.  What 
was  then  true  of  the  clerical  profession  is  still  true. 
"Can  an  Ethiopian  change  his  skin,  or  a  leopard  his 
spots?"  Referring  to  those  who  love  the  creed  above 
the  Bible,  and  who  prefer  leadership  in  sectarian  divi- 
sion to  the  unity  of  hearts  in  Christ,  he  says: 

Take  from  such  the  technicalities  of  their  profession,  the  shibboleth 
of  party,  and  what  have  they  more?  What  have  they  left  to  distin- 
guish and  hold  them  together?  As  to  the  Bible,  they  are  little 
beholden  to  it ;  they  have  learned  little  from  it,  they  know  little  about 
it,  and  therefore  depend  as  little  upon  it.  Nay,  they  will  even  tell 
you  it  would  be  of  little  use  to  them  without  their  formula  ;  they  could 
not  know  a  Papist  from  a  Protestant  by  it;  that  merely  by  it  they 
could  neither  keep  the  Church  nor  themselves  right  for  a  single  week. 
You  might  preach  to  them  what  you  please,  they  could  not  distinguish 
truth  from  error.  Poor  people !  it  is  no  wonder  they  are  so  fond  of 
their  formula.  Therefore  they  that  exercise  authority  upon  them, 
and  tell  them  what  they  are  to  believe  and  what  they  are  to  do,  are 
"galled  benefactors.  These  are  the  reverend  and  right  reverend 
authors,  upon  whom  they  can  and  do  place  a  more  implicit  confidence 
than  upon  the  holy  apostles  and  {)rophets.  These  jilain,  honest,  unas- 
suming men,  who  would  never  venture  to  say  or  do  anything  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  without  an  express  revelation  from  heaven,  and, 
therefore,  were  never  distinguished  by  the  venerable  title  of  "Rabbi" 
or  "Reverend,"  but  just  simply  Paul,  .John,  Thomas,  etc. — these  were 
but  servants.  They  did  not  assume  to  legislate,  and,  therefore, 
neither  assumed  nor  received  any  honorary  titles  among  men,  but 
merely  such  as  were  de8crii)tive  of  their  office.  And  how,  we  beseech 
you,  shall  this  gross  and  prevalent  corruption  be  purgi'd  out  of  the 
visible  professing  Church  but  by  a  radical  reform    \)ut  by  a  returning 


154 


THE  RESTORATION. 


to  the  original  simplicity,  the  primitive  purity  of  the  Christian  institu- 
tion, and,  of  course,  taking  up  things  just  as  we  find  them  upon  the 
sacred  page?  And  who  is  there  that  knows  anything  of  the  present 
state  of  the  Church,  who  does  not  perceive  that  it  is  generally  overrun 
with  the  aforesaid  evils?  Or  who,  that  reads  his  Bible,  and  receives 
the  impressions  it  must  necessarily  produce  upon  the  receptive  mind 
by  the  statements  it  exhibits,  does  not  perceive  that  such  a  state  of 
things  is  as  distinct  from  genuine  Christianity  as  oil  is  from  water? 

In  opposition  to  the  claim  made  that  a  creed  secures 
uniformity  of  belief  and  purity  of  doctrine,  history 
attests  that  Arians,  Socinians,  Arminians,  Calvinists 
and  Antinomians  have  existed  under  the  Westminster 
Confession,  and  under  the  Athanasian  Creed  or  the 
Articles  of  the  Church  of  England. 

"Will  any  one  say,"  it  is  asked,  "that  a  person  might  not  with 
e  jual  ease,  honesty  and  consistency,  be  an  Arian  or  a  Socinian  in  his 
heart  while  subscribing  to  the  Westminster  Confession  or  the  Athana- 
sian Creed,  as  while  making  his  unqualitied  profession  to  believe 
everything  that  the  Scriptures  declare  concerning  Christ? — to  put  all 
that  confidence  in  him,  and  to  ascribe  all  that  glory,  honor  and 
thanksgiving  and  praise  to  him  professed  and  ascribed  to  him  in  the 
Divine  W^ord  ?  If  you  say  not,  it  follows,  of  undeniable  consequence, 
that  the  wisdom  of  men,  in  those  compilations,  has  effected  what  the 
divine  wisdom  either  could  not,  would  not,  or  did  not  do  in  that  all 
perfect  and  glorious  revelation  of  his  will  contained  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. Happy  emendation  !  Blessed  expedient  !  Happy,  indeed, 
for  the  Church  that  Athanasius  arose  in  the  fourth  century  to  perfect 
what  the  apostles  had  left  in  such  a  crude  and  unfinished  state!  But 
if,  after  all,  the  divine  wisdom  did  not  think  proper  to  do  anything 
more,  or  anything  else,  than  is  already  done  in  the  Sacred  Oracles,  to 
settle  and  determine  those  important  points,  who  can  say  that  he  deter- 
mined such  a  tiling  as  should  be  done  afterward  ?  Or  has  he  anywhere 
given  us  any  intimation  of  such  an  intention  ?" 

In  regard  to  the  charge  of  an  ii«*ention  to  make  3 
new  party,  Thomas  Campbell  said,  in  further  defense  of 
his  Thirteen  Propositions:  "  If  the  Divine  Word  be  not 
the  standard  of  a  party,  then  we  are  not  a  party,  for  we 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


have  adopted  no  other.  If  to  maintain  its  alone-suffi- 
ciency be  not  a  party  principle,  then  we  are  not  a  party. 
If  to  justify  this  principle  by  our  practice  in  makin^j  a 
rule  of  it,  and  of  it  alone,  and  not  of  our  own  opinions, 
nor  those  of  others,  be  not  a  party  principle,  then  we 
are  not  a  party.  If  to  propose  and  practice  neither 
more  nor  less  than  it  expressly  reveals  and  enjoins  be 
not  a  partial  business,  then  we  are  not  a  party.  These 
are  the  very  sentiments  we  have  approved  and  recom- 
mended, as  a  society  formed  for  the  express  purpose 
of  promoting  Christian  unity  in  opposition  to  a  party 
spirit. " 

We  have  thus  quoted  copiously  from  the  writings  of 
Thomas  Campbell,  while  he  was  yet  a  Presbyterian  in 
name,  if  not  in  faith,  to  give  our  readers  a  clear  concep- 
tion of  the  origin  of  the  so-called  "  Reformation  "  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  to  show  also  that  the  plea  wc 
are  now  making  in  favor  of  a  complete  restoration  of 
primitive  Christianity  is  based  upon  the  principles  con- 
tained in  that  remarkable  document  styled  the  "Decla- 
ration and  Address."  Says  Dr.  Richardson,  in  his 
Memoirs  of  Alexander  Campbell :  "So  fully  and  so 
kindly  was  every  possible  objection  considered  and 
refuted,  that  no  attempt  was  ever  made  by  the  opposers  of 
tlu  proposed  movement  to  controvert  directly  a  single  position 
wliich  it  contained.''  Says  the  same  biographer:  "To 
all  the  propositions  and  reasonings  of  this  Address, 
Alexander  Campbell  gave  at  once  his  hearty  approba- 
tion, as  they  expressed  most  clearly  the  convictions  to 
which  he  had  himself  been  brought  by  his  experience 
and  observation  in  Scotland,  and  his  reflections  upon 
the  state  of  religious  society  at  large.  Captivated  by  its 
clear  and  decisive  presentations  of  duty,  and  the  noble 


iS6 


THE  RESTORATION. 


■Christian  enterprise  to  which  it  invited,  he  at  once, 
though  unprovided  with  worldly  property,  and  aware 
that  the  proposed  reformation  would,  in  all  probability, 
provoke  the  hostility  of  the  religious  parties,  resolved  to 
consecrate  his  life  to  the  advocacy  of  the  principles 
which  it  presented.  Accordingly,  when,  soon  after- 
ward, his  father  took  occasion  to  inquire  as  to  his 
arrangements  for  the  future,  he  at  once  informed  him 
that  he  had  determined  to  devote  himself  to  the  dissem- 
ination and  support  of  the  principles  and  views  presented 
■in  the  "Declaration  and  Address." 

Thomas  Campbell,  having  been  solicited  both  by  pri- 
vate members  and  by  some  of  the  ministers  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church,  to  form  an  ecclesiastical  union  with 
them,  and  having  been  assured  by  certain  Presbyterian 
ministers  that  the  Presbytery  generally  would  willingly 
■receive  him  and  the  members  of  the  Christian  Associa- 
tion upon  the  principles  they  advocated,  made  overtures 
looking  to  that  end,  in  the  fond  hope  that  by  operating 
through  the  Presbyterian  Church  and  its  various  agencies 
he  might  be  enabled  to  advance  more  effectively  the 
cause  of  Christian  union.  Alexander  had  little  confi- 
-dence  that  his  father  would  succeed  in  propitiating  the 
excited  spirit  of  the  Presbyterians,  who  stood  more  upon 
their  ecclesiastical  dignity  than  upon  their  love  of  Chris- 
tian union.  The  "Synod  of  Pittsburg"  assembled  at 
Washington,  Pennsylvania,  on  the  2d  day  of  October, 
l8io.  This  august  body  refused  to  receive  the  reformer 
into  their  body.  The  grounds  of  their  objection,  it 
appears,  were  the  fears  they  entertained  in  regard  to  the 
influence  of  the  Christian  Association,  which,  as  before 
stated,  was  organized  with  the  sole  view  of  promoting 
Christian  union.    And  it  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  I  5/ 

Presbyterians  have  not,  since  that  day,  cultivated  the 
least  disposition  for  Christian  union,  upon  the  basis  of 
the  Bible  or  upon  any  other  basis.  In  his  address 
before  the  Synod,  Mr.  Campbell  was  careful  to  define 
clearly  the  position  which  the  society  occupied,  and  to 
state  that  it  was  in  no  sense  a  church,  but  simply  a  soci- 
ety organized  for  the  promotion  of  Christian  unity.  He 
earnestly  and  affectionately  proposed  to  the  Synod  to 
be  obedient  to  it  in  all  things  that  the  gospel  and  the 
law  of  Christ  inculcated,  only  desiring  to  be  permitted 
to  advocate  that  sacred  unity  which  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles expressly  enjoined ;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the 
Synod  would  consent  to  "Christian  union  upon  Chris- 
tian principles."  The  Synod  rejected  his  overtures 
because  he  would  not  unite  with  them  on  Presbyterian 
principles. 


THE  BIBLE  THE  ONLY  CREED. 


When  Thomas  Campbell,  from  a  sense  of  duty,  made 
his  second  appeal  to  the  same  Synod  which  had  in  the 
first  instance  replied  to  him  in  very  ambiguous  terms, 
and  asked  for  an  explanation  of  the  clause,  "  many  other 
important  reasons,"  by  which  the  Synod  attempted  to 
justify  its  action,  this  grave  body  of  ecclesiastics  found 
one  of  them  in  the  childish  and  frivolous  pretext  that 
his  son  Alexander  had  been  allowed  to  exercise  his 
gift  of  public  speaking  "without  any  regular  author- 
ity," or  before  ordination — a  liberty  taken  both  by  Knox 
and  Calvin,  and  one  frequently  granted  to  theological 
students.  The  unrighteousness  of  the  rejection  of  the 
application  of  Thomas  Campbell  is  made  manifest  by 
the  fact  that  the  Confession  of  Faith,  under  which  the 
Synod  acted,  declares  the  Bible  to  be  the  only  rule  of 
faith  and  practice ;  and  yet,  when  a  respectable  body  of 
Christian  people  ask  for  admission  they  are  ruled  out — 
cashiered — because  they  will  come  under  no  other  rule 
than  the  Bible!  For  adhering  to  the  "only  rule" 
admitted  to  be  inspired  and  infallible,  and  for  presuming 
to  doubt  the  infallibility  of  the  Westminster  Confession 
— the  production  of  uninspired  men — they  are  rejected  ; 
rejected,  not  for  any  violation  of  the  "only  rule,"  but 
because  they  can  not  admit  that  a  human  creed  or  con- 
fession is  in  reality  the  "only  rule."  Says  Dr.  Richard- 
son, in  his  Memoirs  of  Alexander  Campbell:  "How 
completely  this  verified  the  remark  made  by  Mr.  Camp- 

(158) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


bell  in  his  Declaration  and  Address,  '  That  a  book 
adopted  by  any  party  as  its  standard  for  all  matters  of 
doctrine,  worship,  discipline  and  government,  must  be 
considered  as  the  Bible  of  that  party ! '  And  how  evi- 
dent it  is  that,  in  the  sectarian  world,  there  are  just  as 
many  different  Bibles  as  there  are  different  and  authori- 
Jtative  explanations  of  the  Bible,  called  creeds  and  con- 
fessions !  In  the  case  of  Thomas  Campbell,  it  was  the 
'  Confession, '  and  not  the  Bible,  that  was  made  the 
standard  by  which  one  of  the  best  rren  was  denied 
religious  fellowship."  Is  it  possible  for  sectarian  bigotry 
to  go  beyond  this  ? 

Alexander  Campbell,  at  the  age  of  twenty-two,  now 
comes  forward,  enters  the  arena  of  public  conflict, 
reviews  the  action  of  this  Synod,  and  not  only  justifies 
the  course  pursued  by  his  father,  but  takes  more 
advanced  ground  than  that  occupied  by  his  father. 
The  Christian  Association  of  Washington  held  its  semi- 
annual meeting  at  Washington  on  Thursday,  the  1st  of 
November,  18 10.  Alexander,  the  young  polemic,  was 
not  made  of  such  stuff  as  to  tamely  submit  to  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Synod  in  relation  to  his  father  and  the 
Christian  Association,  and  he  therefore  resolved  to  avail 
himself  of  the  first  opportunity  to  examine  them  pub- 
licly. We  have  not  space  for  the  reproduction  of  this 
masterly  review.  As  to  the  views  entertained  at  this 
time  by  Alexander  Campbell  and  his  father,  it  appears 
from  the  contents  of  the  address  delivered  on  the  occa- 
sion referred  to,  (i)  that  they  regarded  the  religious 
parties  around  them  as  possessing  the  substance  of  Chris- 
tianity, but  as  having  failed  to  preserve  "the  form  of 
sound  words  "  in  which  it  was  proclaimed  in  apostolic 
days ;  and  that  the  chief  object  in  the  proposed  reforma- 


THE  BIBLE  THE  ONLY  CREED. 


tion  was  an  effort  to  induce  all  good  people  to  abandon 
every  human  system,  and  persuade  them  to  the  adoption 
of  "this  form  of  sound  words,"  as  the  infallible  basis  of 
Christian  union.  (2)  That  they  regarded  each  congre- 
gation as  an  independent  organization,  enjoying  its  own 
individuality,  and  maintaining  its  own  internal  govern- 
ment by  elders  and  deacons,  and  yet  not  so  absolutely 
independent  of  other  congregations  as  not  to  be  bound 
to  them  by  fraternal  and  spiritual  relations.  (3)  That 
they  considered  "lay  preaching"  as  authorized,  and 
denied  the  distinction  between  clergy  and  laity  to  be 
scriptural.  (4)  That  they  looked  upon  infant  baptism 
as  without  direct  scriptural  authority,  but  that  they 
were  willing  to  let  it  rest  as  a  matter  of  forbearance,  and 
allow  the  continuance  of  the  practice  in  the  case  of  those 
who  conscientiously  approved  it,  as  Paul  and  James 
permitted  circumcision  for  a  time  in  deference  to  Jewish 
prejudices.  (5)  That  they  clearly  anticipated  the  prob- 
ability of  being  compelled,  on  account  of  the  refusal  of 
the  religious  parties  to  accept  their  overture,  to  resolve 
the  Christian  Association  into  a  distinct  church,  in 
order  to  carry  out  for  themselves  the  duties  and  obliga- 
tions enjoined  on  them  in  the  Scriptures.  (6)  That  in 
receiving  nothing  but  what  was  expressly  revealed,  they 
foresaw  and  admitted  that  many  things  deemed  precious 
and  important  by  the  existing  religious  societies  must 
inevitably  be  excluded. 

Where,  among  all  the  existing  sects,  do  you  find  such 
sentiments  uttered  as  were  uttered  by  Thomas  Camp- 
bell ?  Is  there  one  prominent  man  among  any  of  the 
denominations,  at  this  time,  who  proposes  such  meas- 
ures of  reform  as  were  instituted  by  Thomas  Campbell  ? 
Do  you  hear  any  of  our  Protestant  divines  talk  as  he 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  l6l 

talked,  and  do  you  see  any  of  them  labor  as  he  labored, 
to  crush  out  sectarianism  and  to  purify  the  Church  of  all 
tradition  ?  Do  you  find  one  Protestant  minister  among 
ten  thousand  ministers  making  the  least  plea  for  Chris- 
tian union  upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible?  Not  one. 
Intellectually  and  morally,  in  comparison  with  Thomas 
Campbell,  they  are  all  pigmies. 


12 


ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  ABANDONS 
SECTARIANISM. 


Up  to  March,  1812,  when  the  first  child  of  Alexander 
Campbell  was  born,  the  question  of  infant  baptism  had 
not  given  him  much  concern ;  it  had  not  become  to  him 
a  question  of  practical  interest.  Up  to  this  period,  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  and  the  overthrow  of  sectarianism, 
and  the  restoration  of  the  Bible  to  its  original  position, 
had  chiefly  engaged  his  attention.  In  comparison  with 
these  objects,  the  question  of  baptism  was  one  of  small 
importance,  and,  hence,  neither  himself  nor  his  father 
entertained  any  decided  convictions  upon  this  subject. 
About  a  year  before  the  time  we  are  speaking  of,  in  a 
sermon  founded  on  Mark  xvi.  15-16,  he  said:  "As  I 
am  sure  it  is  unscriptural  to  make  this  matter  a  term  of 
communion,  I  let  it  slip.  I  wish  to  think  and  let  others 
think  on  these  matters."  But  the  unqualified  adoption 
of  the  principle,  ''Where  the  Bible  speaks,  we  speak; 
tvJtere  the  Bible  is  silent,  we  are  silent,''  began  to  press 
upon  him,  and  upon  those  who  attended  the  Brush  Run 
Church,  where  the  question  of  baptism  was  beginning 
to  be  discussed  as  one  of  considerable  importance.  The 
reading  and  investigation  of  the  great  commission  which 
Christ  gave  to  his  apostles  began  to  give  him  serious 
concern.  Admitting  that  infant  baptism  was  without 
divine  warrant,  the  question  began  to  assume  quite  a 
different  aspect,  and  was  now  no  longer,  ' '  May  we 
safely  reject  infant  baptism  as  a  human  invention  ?  "  but 

(162) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


163 


"May  we  omit  believers  baptism,  which  all  admit  to  be 
divinely  commanded?"  He  began  to  be  troubled  with 
the  question,  "If  the  baptism  of  infants  be  without 
divine  warrant,  it  is  invalid,  and  they  who  receive  it  are, 
in  point  of  fact,  still  unbaptized.  When  they  come  to 
know  this  in  after-years,  will  God  accept  the  credulity 
of  the  parent  for  the  faith  of  the  child  ?  Men  may  be 
pleased  to  omit  faith  on  the  part  of  the  person  baptized, 
but  will  God  sanction  the  omission  of  baptism  on  the 
part  of  the  believer,  on  the  ground  that  in  his  infancy 
he  had  been  the  subject  of  a  ceremony  which  had  not 
been  enjoined?  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  practice  of 
infant  baptism  can  be  justified  by  inferential  reasoning  or 
any  sufficient  evidence,  why  should  it  not  be  adopted  or 
continued  by  common  consent,  without  further  discus- 
sion ?  " 

Such  were  some  of  the  reasonings  which,  at  this  time, 
pressed  heavily  upon  the  clear  mind  and  honest  heart 
of  the  youthful  Alexander  Campbell.  Having  finally 
abandoned  all  uninspired  authorities,  he  began  a  critical 
examination  of  the  words  rendered  baptism  and  baptize 
in  the  original  Greek,  and,  as  a  result  of  his  research, 
he  became  thoroughly  satisfied  that  they  could  mean 
only  immersion  and  immerse.  Further  investigation  led 
him  to  the  clear  and  indisputable  conviction  that  believ- 
ers, and  believers  only,  are  proper  scriptural  subjects  of 
baptism.  The  searching  investigations  he  instituted  led 
him  to  perceive  that  the  rite  of  sprinkling,  to  which  he 
had  been  subjected  in  infancy,  was  wholly  unauthorized, 
and  that  consequently  he  was,  in  point  of  fact,  an  unbap- 
tized person,  and  hence  could  not,  consistently,  preach 
a  baptism  to  others  of  which  he  himself  had  never  been 
a  subject.    Concerning  the  immersion  of  Alexander 


164    ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  ABANDONS  SECTARL\NISM, 


Campbell  and  others,  we  quote  the  following  interesting 
narrative  from  the  Memoirs  of  Alexander  Campbell: 

As  he  was  not  one  who  could  remain  long  without  carrying  out  his 
convictions  of  duty,  he  resolved  at  once  to  obey  what  he  now,  in  the 
light  of  the  Scriptures,  found  to  be  a  positive  divine  command.  Hav- 
ing formed  some  acquaintance  with  a  Matthias  Luce,  a  Baptist 
preacher  who  lived  above  Washington,  he  concluded  to  make  applica- 
tion to  him  to  perform  the  rite,  and,  on  his  way  to  visit  him,  called  to 
see  his  father  and  the  family,  who  were  then  living  on  a  little  farm 
between  Washington  and  Mt.  Pleasant.  Soon  after  arriving,  his  sister 
Dorothea  took  him  aside  and  told  him  that  she  had  been  in  great 
trouble  for  some  time  about  her  baptism.  She  could  find,  she  said,  no 
authority  whatever  for  infant  baptism,  and  could  not  resist  the  convic- 
tion that  she  never  had  been  scripturally  baptized.  She  wished  him, 
therefore,  to  represent  the  case  on  her  behalf  to  her  father.  At  this 
unexpected  announcement  Alexander  smiled  and  told  her  that  he  was 
now  on  his  way  to  request  the  services  of  Mr.  Luce,  as  he  had  himself 
determined  to  be  immersed,  and  would  lay  the  whole  case  before  their 
father.  He  took  the  first  opportunity,  accordingly,  of  presenting  the 
matter,  stating  the  course  he  had  pursued  and  the  conclusions  he  had 
reached.  His  father,  somewhat  to  his  sur{3rise,  had  but  little  to  say, 
and  offered  no  particular  objection.  He  spoke  of  the  position  they 
had  heretofore  occupied  in  regard  to  this  question,  but  forbore  to  urge 
it  in  opposition  to  Alexander's  conscientious  convictions.  He  finally 
remarked:  "  I  have  no  more  to  add.  You  must  please  yourself."  It 
was  suggested,  however,  that  in  view  of  the  public  position  they  occu- 
pied as  religious  teachers  and  advocates  of  reformation,  it  would  be 
jiroper  that  the  matter  should  be  publicly  announced  and  attended  to 
amongst  the  people  to  whom  they  had  been  accustomed  to  preach  ;  and 
he  requested  Alexander  to  get  Mr.  Luce  to  call  with  him  on  his  way 
down,  at  whatever  time  might  be  appointed. 

Wednesday,  the  12th  day  of  June,  1812,  having  been  selected,  Elder 
Luce,  in  company  with  Elder  Henry  Spears,  called  at  Thomas  Camp- 
bell's on  their  way  to  the  place  chosen  for  the  immersion,  which  was 
the  deep  pool  in  Buffalo  Creek,  where  three  members  of  the  Associa- 
tion had  formerly  been  baptized.  Next  morning,  as  they  were  setting 
oat,  Thomas  Campbell  simply  remarked  that  Mrs.  Campbell  had  put 
up  a  change  of  raiment  for  herself  and  him,  which  was  the  first  intima- 
tion given  that  they  intended  also  to  be  immersed.  Upon  arriving  at 
tiie  place,  as  the  greater  part  of  the  members  of  the  Brush  Run 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


i65 


Church,  with  a  large  concourse  of  others,  attracted  by  the  noveltj  of 
the  oeeasion,  were  assembled  at  David  Bryant's  house,  near  the  place, 
Thomas  Campbell  thought  it  proper  to  present,  in  full,  the  reasons 
which  had  determined  his  course.  In  a  very  long  address  he  accord- 
ingly reviewed  the  entire  ground  which  he  had  occupied,  and  the 
struggles  that  he  had  undergone  in  reference  to  the  particular  subject 
of  baptism,  which  he  had  earnestly  desired  to  dispose  of  in  such  a 
manner  that  it  might  be  no  hindrance  in  the  attainment  of  Christian 
unity  which  he  had  labored  to  establish  upon  the  Bible  alone.  In 
endeavoring  to  do  this,  he  admitted  that  he  had  been  led  to  overlook 
its  importance,  and  the  very  many  plain  and  obvious  teachings  of  the 
Scriptures  on  the  subject  ;  but  having  at  length  attained  a  clearer  view 
of  duty,  he  felt  it  incumbent  upon  him  to  submit  to  what  he  now 
plainly  saw  was  an  important  divine  institution.  Alexander  afterward 
followed  in  an  extended  defense  of  their  proceedings,  urging  the 
necessity  of  submitting  implicitly  to  all  God's  commands,  and  showing 
that  the  baptism  of  believers  only  was  authorized  by  the  Word  of  God. 

Seven  persons  were  immersed — Alexander  Campbell 
and  his  wife  ;  his  father  and  mother,  and  his  sister ;  with 
James  Hanen  and  his  wife,  the  latter  being  a  very  intel- 
ligent and  courageous  woman.  Alexander  had  stipula- 
ted with  Elder  Luce  that  the  ceremony  should  be 
performed  precisely  according  to  the  apostolic  pattern, 
and  that,  as  there  was  no  account  given  to  show  that 
converts  in  primitive  times  were  called  upon  to  give 
what  is  termed  a  "Christian  experience"  before  they 
had  entered  upon  a  Christian  life,  this  modern  custom 
should  be  omitted,  and  that  the  candidates  should  be 
admitted  on  the  simple  confession  that  "Jesus  Christ 
is  the  Son  of  the  living  God."  Elder  Luce  at  first 
objected,  as  being  contrary  to  Baptist  usage,  but  finally 
N'ielded,  believing  that  the  demand  was  right,  and  that 
he  would  run  the  risk  of  censure.  All  were,  therefore, 
admitted  to  immersion  upon  making  the  simple  but 
comprehensive  confession  of  Christ,  the  same  as  that 
which  was  required  in  apostolic  times.    This  meeting,  it 


.l66    ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  ABANDONS  SECTARIANISM. 

is  related,  continued  about  se7>ett  hours.  From  what  has 
been  related  in  the  foregoing  chapters,  one  can  readily 
perceive  that  the  results  of  honest  investigation  thus 
practically  brought  to  an  issue,  had  been  reached  only 
through  a  series  of  severe  mental  struggles.  Thomas 
Campbell  had  been  a  pedobaptist  minister  for  twenty- 
five  years.  It  never  entered  his  mind,  when  he  first 
began  to  advocate  Christian  union  among  Presbyterians, 
that  his  principles  would  actually  lead  to  the  abandon- 
ment of  infant  baptism.  Having  accomplished  his 
special  mission  in  propounding  and  developing  the  true 
basis  of  Christian  union,  which,  in  a  general  way,  was 
enunciated  in  his  "Declaration  and  Address,"  and 
beyond  which  general  principle  of  union  he  did  not 
seem  disposed  to  advance,  his  illustrious  son  Alexander 
now  changed  positions  with  him,  and  advanced  to  the 
front  as  the  master-spirit  of  the  new  revolution,  deeply 
impressed  with  the  conviction  that  the  hand  of  God  was 
guiding  him  in  a  path  of  duty  and  responsibility  not 
contemplated  by  his  father. 

The  Brush  Run  congregation  continued  to  grow  by 
frequent  accessions  of  immersed  believers;  and  as  it  had 
been  with  the  church  organized  by  the  Haldanes  at 
Edinburgh,  so  to  this  church,  immersion  became  an  apt 
emblem  of  separation  from  the  world — a  separation 
from  the  traditions  of  an  apostate  Church,  a  separation 
from  mystic  Babylon.  They  adopted  immersion  as  the 
only  scriptural  mode  ;  they  rejected  infant  baptism  as  a 
human  invention,  and  the  simple  confession  that  "Jesus 
is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,"  made  to  Christ  by  the 
first  converts,  was  acknowledged  as  the  only  require- 
ment which  could  be  scripturally  demanded  of  those 
who  desired  to  become  members  of  the  one  body.  All 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


these  matters  were  determined  by  the  plahi  and  une- 
quivocal authority  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as,  from  that 
time  to  this,  they  have  continued  to  be  prominent  feat- 
ures in  our  plea  for  a  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order 
of  things.  They  had  now,  indeed,  become  learners  in 
the  school  of  Christ ;  and  in  this  respect  they  differed 
widely  from  all  preceding  reformers,  in  the  fact  that, 
instead  of  making  creeds,  ;r-forming  creeds,  and  re-did- 
justing  creeds,  to  suit  the  changing  times,  and  to  please 
the  changeable  moods  of  men,  they  sought  after  and 
adopted  the  Bible  as  their  only  creed,  and  found  the 
basis  of  Christian  unity  alone  in  the  Word  of  God. 
They  proposed  no  patchwork  of  the  divine  order  of 
things,  but,  finally,  so  far  as  Alexander  Campbell  was 
concerned,  a  radical  reformation  was  determined  upon. 
Abandoning  all  creeds  as  the  outgrowth  of  human  weak- 
ness, and  as  the  groundwork  of  selfish  sectarian  rivals, 
he  proposed  a  reformation  de  novo — a  reformation  that 
would  eventually  result  in  a  complete  restoration.  And, 
hence,  he  instituted  at  once  a  thorough  research  of  the 
entire  grounds  of  Christianity;  and,  by  his  voluminous 
writings,  and  public  debates,  and  by  his  matchless  ser- 
mons, repeated  and  published,  he  rescued  the  Bible 
from  the  hands  of  priests  and  a  hireling  clergy,  and,  in 
defiance  of  the  combined  assaults  of  the  infidel  world, 
placed  Christianity  upon  the  basis  of  authenticity,  cred- 
ibility and  inspiration.  He  found  the  plan  of  salvation 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  not  in  a  set  of  cold,  abstract  prop- 
ositions ;  he  found  a  Savior  in  the  person  of  Jesus  the 
Christ,  and  not  within  the  pale  of  some  sectarian  church  ; 
he  discovered  that  the  Church  of  Christ  was  established 
in  Jerusalem,  and  not  in  Rome,  or  at  Augsburg,  or  at 
Heidelberg,  or  at  Oxford,  or  at  Westminster. 


ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  UNITES  WITH  THE 
BAPTISTS. 


In  1813,  as  in  1889,  baptism,  as  taught  by  Baptists, 
was  not  a  command  of  Jesus  Christ,  made  essential  to 
the  salvation  of  a  sinner,  as  one  of  the  conditions  of 
pardon  and  acceptance,  but  it  was  simply  made  a  door 
into  the  "visible  Church" — a  door  into  the  Baptist 
Church.  The  regenerated  sinner — enlightened,  saved 
and  sanctified  by  the  direct,  irresistible  energy  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  without  faith  in  testimony  and  without  obe- 
dience to  the  gospel — first  became  a  member  of  the 
"invisible  Church"  (whatever  that  is),  and  afterward, 
by  a  vote  of  a  local  Baptist  church,  he  was  allowed  to 
be  baptized  in  order  that  he  might  have  the  inestimable 
privilege  of  communing  with  Baptists  in  a  visible  Baptist 
church !  On  the  contrary,  Alexander  Campbell  and 
those  who  worshiped  with  him  in  the  Brush  Run  con- 
gregation, made  the  discovery,  by  honest  and  candid 
investigation,  that  no  one,  under  apostolic  teaching,  was 
ever  received  into  the  one  body — into  a  state  of  salvation 
and  justification — without  immersion  into  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
They  discovered  that  it  was  by  "the  obedience  of  the 
faith,"  as  well  as  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Son  of 
God,  that  the  sinner  came  into  covenant  relation  with 
God,  and  that  by  this  transition  act  he  was  conveyed 
from  "  the  power  of  darkness  into  the  kingdom  of  God's 
dear  Son."    In  the  Harbinger  for  1848,  page  344,  Alex- 

('68) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


169 


ander  Campbell  tells  how  he  came  to  unite  with  the 
Baptists,  and  the  circumstances  which  led  to  a  condi- 
tional union  with  the  Redstone  Baptist  Association. 
And  here  is  the  narrative : 

After  my  baptism,  and  the  consequent  new  constitution  of  our 
church  of  Brush  Run,  it  became  my  duty  to  set  forth  the  causes  of  this 
change  in  our  position  to  the  professing  world,  and  also  to  justify  them 
by  an  appeal  to  the  Oracles  of  God.  But  this  was  not  all;  the  position 
of  baptism  itself  to  the  other  institutions  of  Christ  became  a  new  sub- 
ject of  examination,  and  a  very  absorbing  one.  A  change  of  one's 
views  on  any  radical  matter,  in  all  its  practical  bearings  and  effects 
upon  all  his  views,  not  only  in  reference  to  that  simple  result,  but  also 
in  reference  to  all  its  connections  with  the  whole  system  of  which  it  is 
a  part,  is  not  to  be  computed,  a  priori,  by  himself  or  by  any  one  eke. 
The  whole  Christian  doctrine  is  exhibited  in  three  symbols — baptism, 
the  Lord's  Supper  and  the  Lord's  Day  institution.  Some,  nay,  very 
many,  change  their  views  in  regard  to  some  one  of  these  without  ever 
allowing  themselves  to  trace  its  connections  with  the  whole  institution 
of  which  it  is  either  a  part  or  a  symbol.  My  mind,  neither  by  nature 
nor  by  education,  was  one  of  that  order.  I  must  know  now  two  things 
about  everything — its  caitse  and  its  relations.  Hence  my  mind  was,  for 
a  time,  set  loose  from  all  its  former  moorings.  It  was  not  a  simple 
change  of  views  on  baptism,  which  happens  a  thousand  times  without 
anything  more,  but  a  new  commencement.  I  was  placed  on  a  new 
eminence — a  new  peak  of  the  mountain  of  God,  from  which  the  whole 
landscape  of  Christianity  presented  itself  to  my  mind  in  a  new  attitude 
and  position. 

I  had  no  idea  of  uniting  with  the  Baptists  more  than  with  the 
Moravians  or  the  mere  Independents.  I  had  unfortunately  formed  a 
very  unfavorable  opinion  of  the  Baptist  preachers  as  then  introduced 
to  my  acquaintance,  as  narrow,  contracted,  illiberal  and  uneducated 
men.  This,  indeed,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  is  still  my  opinion  of  the  min- 
istry of  that  Association  at  that  day  ;  and  whether  they  are  yet  much 
improved  I  am  without  satisfactory  evidence. 

The  people,  however,  called  Baptists,  were  much  more  highly 
appreciated  by  me  than  their  ministry.  Indeed,  the  ministry  of  some 
sects  is  generally  in  the  aggregate  the  worse  portion  of  them.  It  was 
certainly  so  in  the  Redstone  Association,  thirty  years  ago.  They  were 
little  men  in  a  big  office.  The  office  did  not  fit  them.  They  had  a 
wrong  idea,  too,  of  what  was  wanting.    They  seemed  to  think  that  a 


170    ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  UNITES  WITH  THE  BAPTISTS. 


change  of  apparel — a  black  coat  instead  of  a  drab  -  a  broad  rim  on 
their  hat  instead  of  a  narrow  one — a  prolongation  of  the  face  and  a 
fictitious  gravity — a  longer  and  more  emphatic  pronunciation  of  certain 
words,  rather  than  scriptural  knowledge,  humility,  spirituality,  zeal 
and  Christian  affection,  with  great  devotion  and  great  philanthropy, 
were  the  grand  desiderata. 

Along  with  these  drawbacks,  they  had  as  few  means  of  acquiring 
Christian  knowledge  as  they  had  either  taste  or  leisure  for  it.  They' 
had  but  one,  two,  or,  at  the  most,  three  sermons,  and  these  were  either 
delivered  in  one  uniform  style  and  order,  or  minced  down  into  one 
medley  by  way  of  variety.  Of  course,  then,  unless  they  had  an  exu- 
berant zeal  for  the  truth  as  they  understood  it,  they  were  not  of  the 
calibre,  temper  or  attainments  to  relish  or  seek  after  mental  enlarge- 
ment or  independence.  I  could  not,  therefore,  esteem  them,  nor 
court  their  favor  by  offering  any  incense  at  their  shrine.  I  resolved 
to  have  nothing  especially  to  do  with  them  more  than  with  other 
preachers  and  teachers.  The  clergy  of  my  acquaintance  in  other 
parties  of  that  day  were,  as  they  believed,  educated  men,  and  called 
the  Baptists  illiterate  and  uncouth  men,  without  either  learning  or 
academic  accomplishments  or  polish.  They  trusted  to  a  moderate 
portion  of  Latin,  Greek  and  metaphysics,  together  with  a  synopsis  of 
divinity,  ready-made  in  suits  for  every  man's  stature,  at  a  reasonable 
price.  They  were  as  proud  of  their  classic  lore  and  the  marrow  of 
modem  divinity,  as  the  Baptist  was  of  his  "mode  of  baptism"  and 
his  "proper  subject"  with  sovereign  grace,  total  depravity  and  final 
perseverance. 

I  confess,  however,  that  I  was  better  pleased  with  the  Baptist  people 
than  with  any  other  community.  They  read  the  Bible,  and  seemed  to 
care  for  little  else  in  religion  than  "conversion"  and  ''Bible  doctrine." 
They  often  sent  for  us  and  pressed  us  to  preach  for  them.  We  visited 
some  of  their  churches,  and,  on  acquaintance,  liked  the  people  more 
and  the  preachers  less.  Still  I  feared  that  I  might  be  unreasonable, 
and  by  education  prejudiced  against  them,  and  thought  that  I  must 
visit  their  Association  at  Uniontown,  Pa.,  in  the  autumn  of  1812.  I 
went  there  as  an  auditor  and  spectator,  and  returned  more  disgusted 
than  when  I  went.  They  invited  me  "to  preach,"  but  I  declined  it 
altogether,  except  one  evening  in  a  private  family,  to  some  dozen 
preachers  and  twice  as  many  laymen.  I  returned  home,  not  intending 
ever  to  visit  another  Association. 

On  my  return  home,  however,  I  learned  that  the  Baptists  themselves 
did  not  appreciate  the  preaching  of  the  preachers  at  that  meeting. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


171 


They  regarded  the  speakers  as  worse  than  usual,  and  their  discourses 
as  not  edifying — as  too  much  after  the  style  of  John  Gill  and  Tucker's 
theory  of  predestination.  They  pressed  me  from  every  quarter  to 
visit  their  churches,  and,  though  not  a  member,  to  preach  for  them. 
1  often  spoke  to  the  Baptist  congregations  for  sixty  miles  around. 
They  all  pressed  us  to  join  their  Redstone  Association.  We  laid  the 
matter  before  the  Church  in  the  fall  of  1813.  We  discussed  the  pro- 
priety of  the  measure.  After  much  discussion  and  earnest  desire  to 
be  directed  by  the  wisdom  which  cometh  from  above,  we  finally  con- 
cluded to  make  an  overture  to  that  effect,  and  to  write  out  a  full  view 
of  our  sentiments,  wishes  and  determinations  on  that  subject.  We  did 
so  in  some  eight  or  ten  pages  of  large  dimensions,  exhibiting  our 
remonstrance  against  all  human  creeds  as  bonds  of  communion  or  union 
amongst  Christian  churches,  and  expressing  a  willingness,  upon  cer- 
tain conditions,  to  co-operate  or  unite  with  that  Association,  provided 
always  that  we  should  be  allowed  to  teach  and  preach  whatever  we 
learned  from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  regardless  of  any  creed  or  formula 
in  Christendom.  A  copy  of  this  document,  we  regret  to  say,  was  not 
preserved,  and,  when  solicited  from  the  clerk  of  the  Association,  was 
refused. 

The  proposition  was  discussed  at  the  Association,  and,  after  much 
debate,  was  decided  by  a  considerable  majority  in  favor  of  our  being 
received.  Thus  a  union  was  formed.  But  the  party  opposed,  though 
small,  began  early  to  work,  and  continued  with  a  perseverance  worthy 
of  a  better  cause.  There  was  an  Elder  Pritchard,  of  Cross  Creek, 
Virginia;  an  Elder  Brownfield,  of  Uniontown,  Penn.;  an  Elder  Stone, 
of  Ohio,  and  his  son  Elder  Stone,  of  the  Monongahela  region,  that 
seemed  to  have  confederated  to  oppose  our  influence.  But  they,  for 
three  years,  could  do  nothing.  We  boldly  argued  for  the  Bible,  for 
the  New  Testament  Christianity,  vex,  harass,  discompose  whom  it 
might.  We  felt  the  strength  of  our  cause  of  reform  on  every  indica* 
tion  of  opposition,  and  constantly  grew  in  favor  with  the  people. 
Things  passed  along  without  any  prominent  interest  for  some  two  or 
three  yearn. 

The  next  Redstone  Association  convened  at  Cross 
Creek,  August  30,  18 16.  Alexander  Campbell  was 
nominated,  with  others,  as  one  of  the  speakers  for  the 
occasion.  Some  of  the  jealous-minded  ministers  of  the 
Association  opposed  the  nomination,  but  the  opposition 


172    ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  UNITES  WITH  THE  BAPTISTS. 

was  overruled  by  other  members  of  that  body.  When 
it  came  Campbell's  turn  to  preach,  he  selected  for  his 
topic  the  following  words,  as  quoted  from  Rom.  viii.  3 : 
* '  For  what  the  law  could  not  do,  in  that  it  was  weak 
•through  the  flesh,  God  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  like- 
ness of  sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the 
flesh."  This  was  the  young  polemic's  famous  "Sermon 
on  the  Law,"  which  subsequently  created  such  wonder- 
ful excitement  in  the  Baptist  community.  It  was  the 
sudden  explosion,  in  the  Baptist  camp,  of  an  apostolic 
bombshell.  Even  during  its  delivery,  as  soon  as  Elder 
Pritchard  and  other  opposing  preachers  perceived  its 
drift,  they  used  every  means  openly  to  manifest  their 
disapprobation.  A  lady  in  the  congregation  having 
fainted,  Elder  Pritchard  rushed  into  the  stand,  called 
out  some  of  the  preachers,  and  created  great  disturb- 
ance in  the  large  assembly,  apparently  with  a  design  of 
distracting  the  attention  of  the  eager  listeners.  As 
might  be  expected,  much  misrepresentation  followed 
-the  delivery  of  this  discourse.  It  was  on  account  of 
these  misrepresentations  that  Mr.  Campbell  thought  it 
best,  soon  afterward,  to  publish  this  revolutionary  ser- 
mon in  pamphlet  form,  as  the  most  effectual  means  of 
refutation.  The  sermon  is  published  in  full  in  the 
Millennial  Harbinger  for  1846.  It  is  certainly  a  remark- 
able production,  which  is  too  lengthy  to  reproduce  upon 
these  pages.    His  method  of  analysis  was  as  follows : 

1.  Ascertain  what  ideas  we  are  to  attach  to  the  phrase  "  the  law  "  in 
this  and  similar  portions  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  2.  Point  out  those 
things  which  the  law  could  not  accomplish.  3.  Demonstrate  the  reason 
why  the  law  failed  to  accomplish  these  objects.  4.  Illustrate  how  God 
has  remedied  these  relative  defects  of  the  law.  5.  In  the  last  place, 
deduce  such  conclusions  from  these  premises  as  must  obviously  and 
pecessarily  present  themselves  to  every  unbiased  and  reflecting  mind. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


173- 


Measured  by  the  Philadelphia  Confession  of  Faith, 
this  sermon,  in  the  estimation  of  those  bigoted  Baptists, 
was  most  unorthodox  and  mischievously  heterodox. 
And  these  clergy  were  the  more  incensed  because  they 
found  themselves  incapable  of  answering  the  points 
taken  in  the  sermon.  The  object  of  the  sermon  was, 
by  contrasting  the  law  of  Moses  with  the  gospel  of 
Christ,  by  contrasting  the  Old  Covenant  with  the  New 
Covenant — by  showing  the  difference  between  "  the  let- 
ter that  kills"  and  "the  law  of  the  Spirit"  that  gives 
life — to  convince  his  hearers  that  they  could  not  be 
saved  and  justified  by  any  system  of  things  not  author- 
ized by  Jesus  Christ,  the  Head  of  the  Church,  and  not 
proclaimed  by  his  apostles.  This  sermon  invoked  the 
wrath  of  some  of  the  Baptist  clergy,  and  stirred  up 
vengeful  and  uncompromising  opposition.  Subsequent 
to  the  presentation  of  this  unanswerable  address,  this 
Baptist  Association,  for  several  consecutive  years,  by 
means  of  a  self-constituted  ecclesiastical  court,  brought 
charges  of  heretical  teachings  against  Thomas  and  Alex- 
ander Campbell.  Whenever  their  persecutors  failed  to 
sustain  the  charge  of  heresy,  they  would  attempt  to 
tamper  with  the  ignorance  and  prejudices  of  members 
under  their  influence,  and  by  pursuing  this  unchristian 
course  lessen  the  unanimity  of  the  churches  in  favor  of 
the  defendants  in  the  case,  and  increase  the  chances  of 
success  in  their  ultimate  excommunication  from  the 
Baptist  communion.  The  two  Campbells,  foreseeing 
that  it  was  the  fixed  intention  of  their  mischievous  per- 
secutors to  gain  a  majority  of  votes  in  favor  of  their 
excommunication,  severed  their  connection  and  withdrew 
from  the  Redstone  Baptist  Association,  and  united 
themselves  with  the  Mahoning  Baptist  Association,  in^ 


174    ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  UNITES  WITH  THE  BAPTISTS. 

Eastern  Ohio,  and  by  this  step  frustrated  the  precon- 
certed schemes  of  their  maUgnant  opponents.  This 
Association,  being  much  more  enh'ghtened  and  liberal 
in  their  views  of  the  truth,  received  the  two  reformers, 
with  other  delegates  from  the  feeble  churches,  with 
much  cordiality  and  Christian  affection.  This  Associa- 
tion received  them  upon  the  New  Testament  platform 
alone,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  human  creeds  and  ' '  church 
standards." 


A  SIMILAR  REFORMATION  IN  KENTUCKY. 


At  the  time  the  Campbells  were  urging  reformation 
in  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  Western  Pennsylvania, 
there  was  a  movement,  similar  in  character,  going  for- 
ward in  Kentucky,  led  by  Barton  W.  Stone,  a  man  of 
great  irttellectual  force  and  possessed  of  rare  zeal  and 
devotion.  Both  Alexander  Campbell  and  B.  W.  Stone 
sought  to  accomplish  the  same  ends  by  the  same  means. 
Both,  almost  simultaneously,  having  discarded  all 
human  creeds,  sought  Christian  union  exclusively  upon 
the  basis  of  the  Bible.  By  comparing  notes,  it  was  dis- 
covered that  both  were  opposed  to  creeds  as  terms  of 
communion ;  that  both  desired  to  propagate  only  the 
primitive  gospel ;  that  both  were  alike  persecuted  and 
maligned  by  those  who,  glorying  in  orthodoxy  of  opin- 
ion, failed  to  recognize  a  scriptural  unity  of  faith ;  and 
that  both,  after  they  came  to  understand  the  sentiments 
of  each  other,  repudiating  the  despotism  of  opinionisin, 
accepted  only  of  faith  that  was  founded  upon  indisput- 
able testimony.  In  Kentucky,  the  adherents  of  Camp- 
bell were  called  "  Reformers, "  while  at  the  same  time 
the  adherents  of  Stone  were  known  as  "  Christians,"  or 
"Om^ians. "  The  followers  of  Stone  had  been  charged 
with  holding  the  doctrine  of  Arianism,  but  by  inter- 
course with  Stone  and  others,  Campbell  discovered  that 
the  charges  were  unjust  and  untrue.  Campbell  advo- 
cated fellowship  with  all  who  received  the  teachings  of 
the  Scriptures  in  their  simple  and  obvious  meaning,  and 

(»7S) 


176 


A  SIMILAR  REFORMATION  IN  KENTUCKY. 


whose  conduct  corresponded  with  these  teachings.  He 
held  that  there  was  no  need  of  strained  interpretations, 
no  need  of  specious  glosses  or  textual  perversions  where 
no  theological  theory  was  to  be  sustained,  but  where  all 
could  learn  the  truth  by  taking  the  Bible  in  its  proper 
connections,  and  construing  it  in  harmony  with  the 
established  laws  of  language  and  rules  of  interpretation. 
He  held  that  the  simple  truths  of  the  gospel  could  be 
received  by  babes  in  Christ,  and  that  upon  these  com- 
mon truths  all  could  be  united  in  one  body.  In  short, 
the  guiding  principles  of  Campbell  were  substantially 
the  same  as  those  which  guided  the  actions  of  Stone. 
Both  were  alike  devoted  to  the  great  end  of  uniting  the 
true  followers  of  Christ  into  one  communion  upon  the 
Bible  alone,  but,  at  first,  each  regarded  the  method  of 
its  accomplishment  from  his  own  angle  of  vision  ;  and 
since  Campbell  contemplated  the  distinct  congregations, 
with  their  proper  functionaries,  as  the  highest  religious 
executive  authority  on  earth,  he  was  in  doubt  as  to  how 
a  formal  union  could  be  attained,  whether  by  a  general 
convention  of  messengers  or  by  a  general  assembly  of 
the  people.  Suffice  it  to  say,  that  the  coalescing  of  the 
two  peoples  was  brought  about  through  the  spirit  of 
Christ  and  of  brotherly  love. 

Some  notable  men  fell  into  the  wake  of  the  reforma- 
tory movement  of  B.  W.  Stone,  such  as  Samuel  and 
John  Rogers,  Thomas  M.  Allen,  F.  R.  Palmer  and  John 
Allen  Gano — all  grand  characters — and  all  of  whom,  in 
subsequent  years,  distinguished  themselves  as  advocates 
for  a  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of  things.  A 
union  of  the  ' '  Christians  "  and  ' '  Reformers, "  or  between 
the  "Christian  Church  "  and  the  Church  of  the  "Re- 
formers," was  directly  secured  through  the  agency  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


177 


John  T.  Johnson,  a  man  of  rare  self-denial,  a  man  of 
noble  Christian  integrity,  as  well  as  a  natural  orator. 
Johnson  was  originally  a  Baptist,  but  after  examining 
in  the  light  of  the  Bible  what  was  vulgarly  denominated 
"  Campbellism,"  he  separated  from  the  Baptists,  and, 
in  1 83 1,  he  formed  the  nucleus  of  a  congregation  of  six 
on  the  basis  of  the  Bible.  Soon  after,  abandoning  the 
lucrative  practice  of  law,  he  began  the  public  advocacy 
of  the  primitive  gospel.  Becoming  intimately  acquainted 
with  B.  W.  Stone,  who  lived  near  Georgetown,  he  was 
urged  by  the  latter  to  become  co-editor  of  the  Christian 
Messenger,  to  which  he  agreed  at  the  close  of  183 1. 
This  paper  was  conducted  in  the  interests  of  Christian 
union.  Johnson  found  that  a  union  in  sentiment  and 
religious  aims  already  existed  between  the  two  peoples 
—  the  "Christians"  and  "Reformers"  —  to  a  large 
extent.  The  consummation  of  the  union  is  thus 
described  by  Professor  Richardson  in  his  Alemoirs  of 
Alexander  Campbell: 

ThiB  editorial  union  of  B.  W.  Stone  and  John  T.  Johnson  was  soon 
followed  by  a  fraternal  union  between  the  "Christian"  Church  and 
that  of  the  "Keformers"  meeting  in  Georgetown.  Agreeing  to  wor- 
ship together,  they  found  so  much  agreement  in  all  essential  matters, 
and  so  happy  an  effect  produced  in  the  increased  number  of  conver- 
nons,  that  they  were  induced  near  the  close  of  1831  to  appoint  a  general 
meeting  at  Georgetown  to  continue  four  days,  for  the  purpose  of 
considering  the  subject  of  a  complete  union  between  the  two  people. 
This  meeting  included  Christmas  Day,  and  a  similar  one  was  appointed 
for  the  following  week,  including  New  Year's  Day,  at  Lexington. 
Many  of  the  leading  preachers  on  both  sides  attended  and  took  part  in 
these  meetings,  and  so  much  evidence  was  afforded  of  mutual  Christian 
love  and  confidence,  and  such  undoubted  assurances  were  given  of  a 
firm  determination  on  the  part  of  all  to  have  nothing  to  do  with  doc- 
trinal speculations,  but  to  accept  as  conclusive  upon  all  subjects  the 
simple  teachings  of  the  Bible,  that  there  seemed  to  be  no  longer  any- 
thing in  the  way  of  the  most  earnest  and  hearty  co-operation.  Aftpr 
13 


178 


A  SIMILAR  REFORMATION  IN  KENTUCKY. 


the  meeting  at  Lexington,  some  further  friendly  conferences  were  held 
by  means  of  committees,  and,  by  arrangement,  the  members  of  both 
churches  communed  together  on  the  19th  of  February,  agreeing  to 
consuinuiate  the  formal  and  public  union  of  the  two  churches  on  the 
following  Lord's  Day,  the  26th.  During  the  week,  however,  some 
began  to  fear  a  diflSculty  in  relation  to  the  choice  of  elders  and  the 
practical  adoption  of  weekly  communion,  which  they  thought  would 
require  the  constant  presence  of  an  ordained  administrator.  The  per- 
son who  generally  ministered  to  the  Christian  Church  at  Lexington  at 
this  time  was  Thomas  Smith,  a  man  of  more  than  ordinary  abilities 
and  attainments,  and  long  associated  with  the  movement  of  B.  W. 
Stone.  He  was  an  excellent  preacher,  and  was  considered  a  skillful 
debater.  He  possessed  withal  a  very  amiable  disposition,  and  was 
highly  esteemed  by  Mr.  Campbell,  whom  he  often  accompanied  during 
his  visits  in  Kentucky.  He  was  at  first,  like  others,  apprehensive  that 
the  proposed  union  was  premature,  and  that  disagreement  might  arise 
in  regard  to  questions  of  church  order.  The  union  was  therefore  post- 
poned, and  matters  remained  for  a  short  time  stationary  ;  but  it  soon 
became  generally  apparent  that  there  were  no  exclusive  privileges 
belonging  to  preachers  as  it  concerned  the  administration  of  ordinances, 
and  Thomas  M.  Allen,  coming  to  Lexington,  induced  them  to  complete 
the  union  and  to  transfer  to  the  new  congregation,  thus  formed  under 
the  title  of  "the  Church  of  Christ,"  the  comfortable  meeting-house 
which  they  had  previously  held  under  the  designation  of  "  the  Chris- 
tian Church."  This  wise  measure  secured  entire  unanimity,  and  was 
especially  gratifying  to  the  "  Reformers,"  who  had  been  meeting  in  a 
rented  building.  At  Paris,  also,  Mr.  Allen  succeeded  in  effecting  a 
union  between  the  two  churches,  for  one  of  which  he  had  himself  been 
preaching,  while  James  Challen  at  this  time  ministered  to  the  other. 
He  proposed  that  both  he  and  Mr.  Challen  should  retire,  and  that  the 
united  churches  should  engage  permanently  the  services  of  Aylette 
Raines.  This  was  accordingly  done,  and  Mr.  Raines,  leaving  his  field 
in  Ohio,  from  this  time  continued  to  preach  for  the  church  at  Paris,  as 
well  as  for  other  churches  in  Kentucky,  for  more  than  twenty  years, 
aiding  besides  in  numerous  protracted  meetings,  and  by  his  steady, 
unremitting  labors  and  able  advocacy  of  the  Reformation  principles 
greatly  extending  their  influence." — Memoirs  of  Alexander  Campbeli, 
pp.  383-85. 

There  were  present  at  the  Lexington  Conference:  B. 
W.  Stone,  John  T.  Johnson,  John  (Raccoon)  Smith, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


179 


John  Rogers,  G.  W.  EUey  and  Jacob  Creath,  Jr. — all 
notable  men.  The  adherents  of  Stone  did  not  all  follow 
him,  and  some  of  his  brethren  censured  him  for  the 
course  he  had  pursued.  However,  in  the  course  of 
time,  the  great  majority  were  absorbed  in  the  common 
plea  for  Christian  union.  B.  W.  Stone  had  been  raised 
a  Presbyterian.  He  began  his  plea  for  Christian  union 
upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible  in  1804,  eight  years  before 
Alexander  Campbell  was  immersed. 

It  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  at  the  very  time  when 
these  events  were  transpiring  in  Kentucky,  the  same 
.spirit  of  union  was  prevailing  over  sectarianism  and 
bigotry  and  prejudice  in  other  States  also.  John  Long- 
ley,  of  Rush  County,  Indiana,  under  date  of  the  24th 
of  December,  183 1,  says: 

The  Reforming  Baptists  and  we  are  all  one  here.  We  hope  that 
the  dispute  between  you  and  Bro.  Campbell,  about  names  and  priority, 
will  forever  cease,  and  that  you  will  go  on,  united,  to  reform  the 
world. 

Griffith  Cathey,  of  Tennessee,  on  the  4th  of  January, 
1832,  writes  substantially  as  follows: 

The  members  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  the  members  known  by 
the  name  of  Disciples,  or  Reformed  Baptists,  regardless  of  all  charges 
about  Trinitarianism,  Arianism  and  Socinianism,  and  of  the  questions 
whether  it  is  possible  for  any  person  to  get  to  heaven  without  immer- 
sion, or  whether  immersion  is  for  the  remission  of  sins,  have  come 
forward,  given  the  right  hand  of  fellowship,  and  united  upon  the 
plain  and  simple  gospel. 

Alexander  Campbell,  by  his  commanding  talents,  by 
his  great  force  of  character  and  by  his  invincible  cour- 
age, overshadowed  all  other  reformers,  and  at  once,  by 
common  consent  of  all  parties,  became  the  acknowl- 
edged champion  —  the  admired  leader  —  of  the  great 
onslaught  upon  the  sectarian  world.    B,  W.  Stone  died 


l8o  A  SIMILAR  REFORMATION  IN  KENTUCKY. 

at  the  age  of  eighty-four,  after  having  spent  his  Hfe  iiT 
laboring  incessantly  for  the  union  of  God's  people.  He 
was  a  grand  character,  a  man  of  noble  instincts,  of  supe- 
rior intelligence,  and  greatly  loved  and  admired  for  his 
unselfish  and  philanthropic  devotion  to  the  cause  of 
Christ.  He  lives  in  history  as  one  of  the  most  distin- 
guished factors  in  the  greatest  religious  revolution  of 
modern  times. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 


By  degrees  the  Mahoning  Baptist  Association  lost  its 
legislative  and  ecclesiastical  character,  under  the  reforma- 
tory movements  of  the  Campbells,  and  their  coadjutors, 
and  the  ministers  of  a  free  people,  heretofore  living 
under  the  influence  of  this  Association,  gradually  lost 
their  affection  for  human  tradition  and  theological  specu- 
lations, which  had  been  made  tests  of  Christian  fellow- 
ship ;  so  that,  in  due  course  of  time,  by  learning  how  to 
use  the  rules  of  Bible  interpretation — how  to  quote  and 
apply  Scriptures — how  to  distinguish  the  law  from  the 
gospel — how  to  distinguish  the  Jewish  from  the  Chris- 
tian dispensation,  and  the  Patriarchal  from  the  Jewish — 
this  Association  entirely  lost  its  distinctive  ecclesiastical 
features,  and  was  finally  absorbed  by  the  "Big  Meet- 
ings" of  the  "Western  Reserve." 

It  never  was  in  the  mind  of  either  Thomas  or  Alex- 
ander Campbell  to  start  a  new  sect ;  indeed,  as  we  have 
already  shown,  they  disclaimed  and  abhorred  the  very 
idea;  they  simply  sought  reformation  within  their  own 
ranks,  as  did  the  reformers  of  the  three  preceding  cen- 
turies. But  now,  under  the  guidance  of  a  gracious 
Providence,  having  broken  away  from  all  traditional 
trammels  —  the  principles  of  the  "Declaration  and 
Address"  pushing  them  to  the  front  by  logical  necessity 
— having  escaped  the  clerical  yoke  of  spiritual  bondage 
— and  having  accepted  the  Bible  as  their  only  safe  and 
infallible  guide,  and  acknowledging  Jesus  the  Christ  as 

(i8i) 


l82  THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 


their  only  infallible  lawmaker  and  legislator,  these  illus- 
trious reformers,  with  other  mighty  men  of  influence 
and  eloquence,  from  the  Protestant  denominations,  from 
this  time  forward  began  to  advocate,  not  simply  church 
reformation — which  was  all  that  the  earlier  reformers 
sought  to  accomplish — but  an  entire  restoration  of  the 
apostolic  order  of  things.  They  now  resolved  to  go  back 
beyond  Philadelphia,  beyond  Oxford,  beyond  Westmin- 
ster, beyond  Geneva,  beyond  Augsburg,  beyond  Heidel- 
berg, beyond  Rome,  and  back  to  Jerusalem,  and  there 
begin  a  new  survey  of  the  great  domain  of  apostolic 
Christianity.  Accordingly,  it  was  not  long  until  the 
Christian  Baptist,  and  other  contemporaneous  periodi- 
cals, were  started  to  advocate  this  plea;  a  Bible  college 
was  organized  in  the  interest  of  this  plea ;  a  host  of  elo- 
quent preachers  entered  body  and  soul  into  the  work, 
and,  as  a  consequence,  converts  from  the  world  and 
from  sectariandom  were  made  by  thousands. 

If  Martin  Luther  wrested  the  Bible  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  Roman  priesthood,  and  gave  it  to  the  people — 
which  had  been  a  sealed  book  to  the  masses — Alexan- 
der Campbell  did  a  mightier  work  by  wresting  from  the 
hands  of  the  Papal  and  Protestant  clergy  false  keys  of 
Bible  interpretation,  while  at  the  same  time  he  restored 
to  the  people  the  only  correct  and  approved  rules  of 
interpretation,  which,  without  the  aid  of  the  private  and 
mystic  explanations  of  especially  "called  and  sent 
preachers,"  would  enable  them  to  understand  the  Word 
of  God  for  themselves.  He  taught  the  people  how  to 
read  the  Scriptures  intelligently,  and  how  to  "accu- 
rately divide  the  Word  of  Truth."  He  showed  how 
necessary  it  is  to  know  where  a  thing  was  done,  when  it 
was  done,  how  it  was  done,  and  by  whom  it  was  done 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


whether  the  person  speaking  was  a  Jew  or  a  Christian  ; 
whether  the  persons  addressed  were  saints  or  sinners; 
whether  under  the  Old  Covenant,  or  under  the  New 
Covenant ;  whether  the  speakers  were  discussing  the 
law  or  the  gospel ;  whether  those  who  wrote  had  refer- 
ence to  the  Church  of  Christ,  or  to  the  "  church  that 
was  set  up  in  the  wilderness"  by  Moses;  or  whether 
the  gospel  in  fact  was  first  preached  by  Abraham,  or  by 
the  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ ;  or  whether  the  law  of  par- 
don, in  relation  to  the  sinner,  emanated  from  Moses,  a 
fallible  man,  or  from  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  divine  Son 
of  God. 

Following  the  motto  that  ' '  where  the  Bible  speaks,  ive 
speak;  where  the  Bible  is  silent,  we  are  silent,''  Alexan- 
der Campbell,  both  in  preaching  and  writing,  showed 
the  difference  between  facts  and  opinions — between  per- 
sonal knowledge — the  knowledge  of  the  senses — and 
faith  founded  on  testimony.  He  utterly  repudiated  the 
idea  that  the  opinions  of  men  should  be  made  tests  of 
Christian  fellowship.  These  he  regarded  as  only  private 
property,  and  that,  as  such,  they  should  be  always  held 
in  abeyance,  and  never  be  intruded  into  the  domain  of 
fact  and  faith.  He  simplified  the  whole  matter  by 
showing  that  facts  are  to  be  believed,  commands  to  be 
obeyed,  and  the  promises  of  the  gospel  to  be  enjoyed. 
The  commonest  mind  could  apprehend  these  simple  but 
grand  divisions  of  the  scheme  of  redemption. 

He  showed  that  the  plan  of  salvation  was  a  divine 
and  sublime  and  glorious  unity — that  there  is  "one 
Lord,  one  faith,  and  one  baptism,"  and  that  ''the  doc- 
trine of  Christ "  is  a  proposition  altogether  different 
from  the  "doctrines  of  men,"  and  from  the  'doctrines 
of  demons."    He  contended — and  his  arguments  remain 


184  THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 

unassailable  to  the  present  day — that  the  Bible,  and  the 
Bible  only,  can  be  made  the  basis  of  Christian  unity, 
and  that  no  unit)-,  either  in  form  or  in  spirit,  can  ever 
take  place  until  all  creeds,  Confessions  of  Faith, 
"Church  Standards,"  and  denominational  titles — such 
as  Episcopal,  Lutheran,  Presbyterian,  Baptist,  Metho- 
dist and  Roman  Catholic — shall  be  removed  out  of  the 
way.  All  these  are  divisive  of  the  "one  body,"  of 
which  body  Christ  is  the  one  living  and  all-animating 
Head. 

Campbell  insisted  that  Bible  things  should  be  incul- 
cated in  Bible  words,  that  all  theological  terminologies 
should  be  abandoned,  and  that  the  nomenclature  of 
scholastic  schools  should  be  rejected,  as  only  serving  to 
confuse  and  discourage  "  the  common  people  who  gladly 
hear  the  word,"  and  who  can  not  comprehend  meta- 
physics, theological  abstractions,  and  inferential  deduc- 
tions. He  taught — as  do  the  "  Disciples  of  Christ " 
now  uniformly — that  "the  gospel  is  the  power  of  God 
unto  salvation,"  and  that  God  has  revealed  no  power 
above  and  beyond  the  gospel,  as  essential  to  enlighten- 
ment and  conviction  of  sin.  He  did  not  limit  the  power 
of  the  Spirit,  but  he  maintained  that  we  have  no  right 
to  pry  into  mysteries  which  the  Almighty  Father  has 
not  revealed.  ' '  Secret  things  belong  to  God,  but 
revealed  things  to  us  and  our  children." 

He  taught  that  the  revealed  promises  of  God  are  the 
only  evidences  of  pardon  in  our  possession,  and  while 
relying  implicitly  and  unequivocally  upon  the  Word  of 
God,  he  rejected  all  sensuous  evidence  of  pardon,  such 
as  psychological  impressions,  dreams,  apparitions,  super- 
natural visitations,  ecstasies ;  all  of  which  superstitious 
notions  were  prevailing  at  the  time  when — eighty  years 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


185 


ago — the  Campbells  proposed  to  abandon  the  sectarian 
world  and  return  to  the  Bible  and  apostolic  teaching. 
Of  course,  as  a  consequence  of  the  principles  which  they 
adopted,  they  could  do  no  other  than  throw  overboard, 
as  lumber  of  the  mystical  and  monkish  ages,  all  specu- 
lative theories  of  conversion — the  doctrine  of  direct 
supernatural  agency — and  show,  by  apostolic  teaching, 
that  it  is  the  moral  power  of  divine  truth,  as  exerted 
through  the  gospel,  that  changes  the  moral  nature  of 
man. 

By  an  appeal  to  the  New  Testament,  they  showed 
that  the  working  of  miracles,  by  the  apostles,  was 
designed  as  a  "confirmation  of  the  word,"  as  revealed 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  that  in  no  place  is  it  recorded 
that  a  miracle  ever  changed  the  heart  of  a  sinner. 
"Signs,"  says  Paul,  "are  not  for  them  that  believe,  but 
for  them  that  believe  not.'"  The  sinner  is  saved  by  faith 
in  Jesus  the  Christ,  and  by  obedience  to  the  conditions 
of  the  gospel. 

Giving  up  infant  baptism,  while  they  were  yet  Pres- 
byterians in  name,  by  a  direct  course,  through  Bible 
investigation,  they  came  to  that  point,  where,  in  the 
absence  of  all  testimony,  they  were  obliged  to  surrender 
both  rantism  and  affusion,  as  being  without  the  least 
authority  in  the  Word  of  God. 

While  accepting  all  the  measures  of  reform  as  accom- 
plished by  Luther,  Zwingle,  Calvin,  Melancthon,  John 
Wesley  and  Roger  Williams,  which  were  accomplished 
in  harmony  with  the  inspired  Scriptures,  Alexander 
Campbell,  and  those  royal  spirits  co-operating  with  him, 
laid  aside  as  impracticable  all  the  theological  specula- 
tions and  false  dogmas  of  those  reformers,  with  all  their 


lS6  THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 


contradictory  deductions  from  human  reason,  unsup- 
ported by  a  "Thus  saith  the  Lord." 

Having  fully  committed  himself  to  a  "  Restoration  of 
the  Ancient  Order  of  Things,"  Alexander  Campbell 
encountered,  in  the  outset,  three  popular  systems  of 
denominational  justification,  all  of  which,  while  being 
essentially  the  same  in  principle,  flatly  contradict  the 
Word  of  God.  These  were  Calvinism,  Arminianism 
and  Universalism.  The  central  idea  of  the  first  is  this: 
That  God  had  from  all  eternity  decreed  the  salvation  of 
his  own  elect  few,  whose  number  can  neither  be  increased 
nor  diminished,  while  condemning  all  the  rest  of  man- 
kind to  eternal  reprobation.  And  further,  that  man 
being  totally  depraved,  and  incapable  of  any  volition 
toward  good  thoughts  or  good  deeds,  can  only  be 
renewed  in  life  by  the  irresistible  grace  of  God.  The 
second  theory  embraces  this  idea:  That,  as  it  is  impos- 
sible for  man  to  repent  of  his  sins,  until  he  receives  the 
gift  of  faith  direct  from  heaven,  he  must  remain  in  his 
sins  until  God,  in  his  own  good  time,  sends  down  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  regenerate  him.  Man  can  do  nothing, 
God  must  do  all ;  man  must  wait,  and  if  God  chooses 
not  to  visit  him,  he  is  lost.  The  third  theory  is  to  this 
effect:  That  God  has  from  all  eternity  decreed  the  sal- 
vation of  all  men,  and  that  all  men,  without  the  loss  of 
one  soul,  will  be  made  finally  holy  and  happy.  Take 
either  one  of  these  systems,  and  it  is  clear  to  be  seen 
that  man  has  nothing  at  all  to  do  in  securing  his  own 
salvation — that  his  salvation  or  condemnation  is  wholly 
in  the  hands  of  a  stern  and  implacable  God ;  that  salva- 
tion is  entirely  unconditional ;  that  man  is  wholly  and 
helplessly  passive,  and  therefore  irresponsible.  Camp- 
bell held  that  if  these  systems  are  in  harmony  with  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


187 


moral  government  of  God,  then  is  man  not  a  free  moral 
agent ;  that  there  is  no  virtue  in  preaching  the  gospel ; 
that  there  is  no  need  of  a  Mediator,  and  that  a  remedial 
scheme  is  a  superfluity,  if  not  an  absolute  myth. 

The  effects  of  the  religious  revolution  inaugurated  by 
the  Campbells  were  not  foreseen  by  them  and  their 
coadjutors.  Their  steps  evidently  were  guided  by  the 
providence  of  God ;  and  now  there  is  not  a  pulpit  or  a 
religious  journal  in  the  land  that  has  not  either  directly 
or  indirectly  been  influenced  by  the  plea  of  those  godly 
men,  to  reject  many  of  the  grosser  forms  of  a  perverted 
Christianity.  On  the  question  of  Christian  union — 
toward  the  consummation  of  which  grand  object  Alex- 
ander Campbell  gave  the  undivided  energies  of  his 
eventful  life — there  is  now  a  rapidly-growing  sentiment 
among  all  good  men  in  the  various  denominations. 
Campbell  held  that  all  denominations  never  could  unite 
as  one  spiritual  body — neither  as  Presbyterians,  nor  as 
Episcopalians,  nor  as  Lutherans,  nor  as  Methodists,  nor 
as  Baptists,  nor  upon  any  other  sectarian  name ;  but 
that  they  could  unite  as  Christians,  that  being  designa- 
ted as  the  scriptural  name  of  the  followers  of  Christ,  the 
Founder  of  the  Church.  He  held  that  all  these  church 
titles  were  of  purely  human  origin,  that  they  tended 
continually  toward  carnality  and  the  secularization  of 
divine  things,  and  that  as  central  ideas  of  church  polities 
— each  polity  antagonizing  every  other  polity — they 
contradict  the  last  intercessory  prayer  of  our  Savior,  who 
prayed  that  all  his  disciples  might  be  of  one  mind  and 
heart ;  that  as  he  and  his  Father  are  one,  so  his  disciples 
might  be  one  with  them,  that  the  world  might  believe 
that  he  is  the  Messiah — Christ  himself  representing  the 
one  true  vine,  and  his  disciples  the  branches,  which  fact 


i88 


THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 


forever  excludes  the  idea  that  denominations  constitute 
"branches"  of  the  "one  body."  When  Christ  said, 
"  Upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,"  the  concep- 
tion of  a  Papal  or  Protestant  Church,  or  a  Gallican  or 
Anglican  Church,  was  not  present  in  his  mind.  So 
many  diverse  bodies  can  not  possibly  possess  the  Spirit 
of  Christ.  The  spirit  of  «an  is  in  them,  and  hence  they 
can  not  be  divine. 


THE  RESTORATION  OF  APOSTOLIC  CHRIS. 
TIANITY. 


In  closing  our  series  of  articles  on  Reformatory  Move- 
ments, we  propose  to  give  the  results  of  the  religious 
revolution  as  inaugurated  by  Alexander  Campbell. 

It  has  been  made  evident  by  the  numerous  facts  which 
we  have  heretofore  narrated,  that  Campbell  worked 
himself  out  of  spiritual  Babylon  by  a  thorough  investi- 
gation of  the  Scriptures,  and  that  he  abandoned  all 
Protestant  sects  because  he  could  not  find  the  basis  of 
Christian  union  in  any  one  of  them.  He  faithfully  fol- 
lowed the  logic  of  God's  Word  to  the  end.  He  dis- 
carded the  deductions  of  human  reason  as  a  logical 
necessity,  and  settled  all  controversies  by  a  direct 
appeal  to  the  law  and  authority  of  Jesus  the  Christ. 
He  estabHshed  the  proposition  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
only  begotten  Son  of  God,  by  the  most  majestic  and 
incontrovertible  arguments  that  were  ever  penned  by 
mortal  man.  His  arguments  on  the  divinity  of  Christ 
stand  before  the  world  without  a  parallel.  His  theses 
on  the  Person  of  Christ,  as  Prophet,  Priest  and  King, 
and  as  the  only  Savior  of  men,  and  as  the  only  hope  of 
the  world,  have  never  been  excelled.  He  showed  that 
salvation  from  sin  is  not  in  subscription  to  creeds  or 
dogmas ;  not  in  joining  some  orthodox  church ;  not  in 
indorsing  the  opinions  of  men,  however  hoary  with  age  ; 
but  in  a  person,  in  the  Person  of  Christ ;  that  "  all  the 
promises  of  God  are  in  him  yea,  and  in  him  amen." 

(189J 


I  go     THE  RESTORATION  OF  APOSTOLIC  CHRISTIANITY. 

The  ground  of  assurance  we  occupy  may  now  be 
briefly  stated : 

I.  Our  creed  is  the  Inspired  Word  of  God  ;  no  more, 
no  less. 

II.  We  believe  with  all  the  heart  that  the  Word  of 
God — the  Plan  of  Salvation — was  miraculously  revealed 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  that  the  revealed  Word  was 
confirmed  by  miraculous  attestations  of  divine  power. 

III.  We  believe  that  the  gospel — which  consists  of 
the  death,  burial  and  resurrection  of  Christ — is  the 
power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  who  believes 
it  and  obeys  it. 

IV.  Accepting  of  no  theory  of  regeneration,  and  dis- 
carding alike  all  mystical  influences  and  all  scholastic 
vagaries,  we  believe  that  sinners  who  are  brought  under 
the  power  of  the  truth,  are  begotten  of  the  Word  of  God 
— are  begotten  through  the  gospel — are  made  alive  by  the 
truth,  and  born  of  water. 

V.  We  believe  that  immersion,  preceded  by  genuine 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Savior  of  men,  and  preceded 
by  genuine  repentance  toward  God,  is,  if  done  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  for  the  remission  of  past  sins,  and  that  it  is  the 
consummating  act  in  the  divine  process  of  salvation. 

VI.  Taking  the  Scriptures  as  our  infallible  guide  in 
all  spiritual  things,  we  believe  that  the  heart  of  the  sin- 
ner is  changed  by  the  truth  contained  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  that  it  is  the  moral  power  of  God  found  in  the 
divine  testimonies,  which,  when  brought  to  bear  upon 
the  sinner's  heart,  changes  his  moral  nature,  and  makes 
him  a  "new  creature"  in  Christ  Jesus.  We  believe 
that  the  truth,  as  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  was 
intended  by  the  heavenly  Father  to  "convince  the  world 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


191 


of  sin,  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment  to  come;" 
that  in  conversion,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  agent,  and  the 
word  revealed  by  the  Spirit  the  instrument.  We  believe 
that  it  is  the  Word  of  God,  w^ielded  by  the  Spirit,  that 
does  the  execution,  and  that  it  is  the  Word  of  God,  as 
the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  that  slays  the  sinner  and  destroys 
his  love  of  sin.  As  we  do  not  believe  in  the  efficacy  of 
the  Word  without  the  presettce  of  the  Spirit,  neither  do 
we  believe  in  a  direct  mystical  operation  of  the  Spirit 
without  the  presence  of  the  Word  in  the  sinner's  heart. 

VII.  We  believe  that  the  act  of  pardon  takes  place  in 
the  mind  of  God,  and  not  in  the  sinner's  heart;  and  we 
know  this  to  be  so,  because  the  conditions  of  pardon  are 
found  recorded  in  the  revealed  will  of  God.  We  do  not 
believe  that  a  sinner — by  the  mere  testimony  of  his 
feelings — has  a  personal  consciousness  of  the  pardon  of 
his  sins.  Remission  of  sins  is  purely  a  matter  of  faith 
in  the  promises  of  God,  and  not  a  mere  matter  of  con- 
scious feeling,  as  produced  by  a  psychological  state  of 
heart  or  affections.  It  is  the  love  of  God  that  changes 
the  sinner's  heart,  and  it  is  the  truth  that  convicts  the 
sinner  of  sin ;  and  it  is  God  who  remits  sin  through 
obedience  to  the  gospel.  Of  course,  we  here  only  pro- 
pose to  give  statements,  not  arguments. 

VIII.  We  do  not  pretend  to  limit  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  but,  in  the  absence  of  testimony,  we  can 
not  believe  that  there  is  a  superadded  power,  beyond 
and  apart  from  the  gospel,  necessary  to  the  conviction 
of  the  sinner.  Such  a  speculation  was  never  even  hinted 
at  by  Christ  and  his  apostles.  In  all  doctrinal  matters, 
and  in  all  questions  of  commands  and  personal  obe- 
dience, "  where  the  Bible  speaks,  we  speak;  and  where 
the  Bible  is  silent,  we  are  silent."    We  are,  therefore, 


192     THE  RESTORATION  OF  APOSTOLIC  CHRISTIANITY. 


as  much  bound  to  respect  the  silence  of  the  Bible,  as  we 
are  bound  to  honor  its  utterances. 

IX.  We  believe  that  God  only  acknowledges  one 
body  of  believers,  and  that  all  converted  men,  in  order 
to  become  members  of  the  one  body  of  Christ,  must,  by 
the  teachings  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  be  "immersed  into 
the  one  body."  We  designate  the  one  body,  of  which 
Christ  is  the  one  all  animating  head,  the  Church  of 
Christ,  because  the  body  is  constituted  of  those  who 
believe  in  Christ,  obey  Christ,  and  walk  in  Christ.  We 
call  ourselves  Christians,  because  Christ  is  our  only 
King  and  Lawgiver,  and  him  only  do  we  propose  to 
follow.  We  call  ourselves  the  Disciples  of  Christ, 
because  we  learn  only  from  Christ  and  his  apostles. 

X.  In  church  edification,  in  worship,  in  disciplinary 
matters,  and  in  the  weekly  communion,  we  take  the 
New  Testament  as  our  only  rule  of  faith  and  practice. 

There  are  some  things  we  do  not  believe,  because  not 
authorized  and  sustained  by  the  Word  of  God. 

1.  We  do  not  believe  in  sectarian  churches,  nor  in 
Protestant  denominationalism,  nor  in  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic Church,  or  any  other  church  that  has  an  existence 
without  the  sanction  of  God's  Word. 

2.  We  do  not  believe  in  human  creeds,  in  speculative 
dogmas,  in  theories  of  regeneration,  in  the  mourning- 
bench  business,  in  dreams  and  apparitions,  in  phantasies 
and  ecstasies,  nor  in  sensuous  feelings,  as  guides  in  the 
way  of  obedience  and  of  a  divine  life. 

3,  We  do  not  believe  in  a  direct,  special,  irresistible 
theory  of  regeneration. 

4,  We  do  not  believe  in  infant  baptism,  nor  in  affu- 
sion, nor  rantism.  We  have  good  reason  to  believe  that 
they  originated  in  an  apostate  church. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


5.  We  do  not  believe  in  a  Roman  Church,  nor  in  an 
Episcopal  Church,  nor  in  a  Lutheran  Church,  nor  in  a 
Presbyterian  Church,  nor  in  a  Baptist  Church,  nor  in  a 
Methodist  Church,  nor  in  any  other  church  not  known 
in  the  apostolic  age.  We  do  not  believe  in  any  human 
organization  as  a  substitute  for  the  Church  of  the  living 
God. 

6.  We  do  not  believe  that  persons  who  have  never 
been  immersed  into  Jesus  Christ — into  the  death  of 
Christ — into  the  one  body — are  members  of  the  one 
body. 

7.  We  do  not  believe  that  morality,  no  matter  how 
high  its  character  or  how  highly  prized  by  men,  will 
save  a  soul  from  eternal  death,  without  the  righteousness 
of  Christ,  and  without  the  righteousness  of  God. 

8.  We  do  not  believe  that  God  will  save  men  by  faith 
alone,  or  by  repentance  alone,  or  by  baptism  alone,  or 
by  grace  alone,  or  by  works  alone.  We  believe  that 
God  will  save  men  who  sustain  the  relation  of  a  Chris- 
tian, and  who  have  the  character  of  a  Christian.  This 
is  inclusive  of  all  possible  good. 

9.  We  do  not  believe  in  a  Papal  form  of  church  gov- 
ernment, nor  in  an  Episcopal  form  of  church  govern- 
ment, nor  in  a  Presbyterial  form  of  church  government; 
but  we  do  believe  in  the  independency  of  every  congre- 
gation, as  regards  church  government,  and  in  the  sov- 
ereign right  of  every  congregation  to  choose  its  own 
officers,  such  as  elders  and  deacons.  We  also  believe 
that  while  the  congregations  maintain  a  separate  gov- 
ernmental independency,  they  are  at  the  same  time 
spiritually  and  sympathetically  united  in  Christ  as  one 
harmonious  body,  and  that  they  are  mutually  bound  to 
co-operate  in  the  accomplishment  oi  the  same  grand 

14 


194     THE  RESTORATION  OF  APOSTOLIC  CHRISTIANITY. 

objects,  especially  in  proclaiming  the  glad  tidings  of 
salvation  and  establishing  congregations  according  to 
the  apostolic  model. 

What  we  have  now  mapped  out  as  the  ground  we 
occupy,  we  are  thoroughly  convinced  is  truly  the  apos- 
tolic ground,  and  a  ground  of  unity  about  which  there 
can  be  no  intelligent  controversy.  The  ground  we 
occupy  excludes  all  sectarianism.  All  the  people  of 
God  may  occupy  this  ground.  We  invite  all  men  to 
receive  the  same  Bible  we  receive  ;  to  accept  the  same 
creed  we  accept ;  to  honor  the  same  Lord  we  honor;  to 
obey  the  same  gospel  we  obey ;  to  bear  the  same  scrip- 
tural titles  we  bear;  to  "walk  by  the  same  rules,"  to 
"mind  the  same  things,"  to  "speak  the  same  things," 
to  be  "joined  together  in  the  same  judgment,"  to  con- 
tend earnestly  for  the  same  faith. 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


Many  writers,  Protestant  as  well  as  Romanist,  have 
regarded  the  assembly  of  the  apostles  and  elders  of 
Jerusalem,  of  which  we  read  in  Acts  xv. ,  as  the  first 
ecclesiastical  council,  and  the  model  on  which  others 
were  formed,  in  accordance,  as  they  suppose,  with  a 
divine  command  or  apostolic  institution.  But  this  view 
of  the  subject  is  unsupported  by  the  testimony  of  the 
apostolic  times,  and  is  at  variance  with  the  opinions  of 
the  earliest  writers,  who  refer  to  the  councils  of  the 
Church,  Tertullian  speaks  of  the  ecclesiastical  assem- 
blies of  the  Asiatic  and  European  Greeks  as  a  human 
institution  ;  and  in  a  letter  written  by  Firmilian,  Bishop 
of  CiEsarea,  to  Cyprian,  about  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  the  same  custom  is  referred  to  merely  as  a  con- 
venient arrangement  existing  at  that  time  among  the 
churches  of  Asia  Minor  for  common  deliberation  on 
matters  of  extraordinary  importance.  Besides  this,  it 
will  be  discovered,  upon  examination,  that  the  councils 
of  the  Church  were  assemblages  of  altogether  a  differ- 
ent nature  from  that  of  the  apostles;  the  only  point  in 
which  the  alleged  model  was  really  imitated  being,  per- 
haps, the  form  of  the  preface  to  the  decree,  "It  has 
seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Spirit  and  to  us." — Studten  u. 
Kritiken,  1842,  i.  102  sq. 

A  council  is  an  assembly  of  bishops  or  pastors  called 
together  for  the  discussion  and  regulation  of  ecclesias- 
tical affairs.    The  beginning  of  the  system  of  church 

(195) 


196 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


councils  is  traced  to  the  meeting  of  the  apostles  and' 
elders  at  Jerusalem,  as  recorded  in  Acts  xv.  This,  as 
mentioned  above,  is  generally  considered  to  be  the  first 
council;  but  it  differed  from  all  others  in  this  circum- 
stance, that  it  was  under  the  special  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Roman  Catholic  writers  speak  of  four 
apostolical  councils,  viz.:  Acts  i.  13,  for  the  election 
of  an  apostle;  Acts  vi.,  to  choose  deacons;  Acts  xv., 
the  one  named  above;  Acts  xxi.  18  sq.  But  none  of 
these  had  a  public  and  general  character,  except  the 
one  in  Acts  xv.  (Schaff,  History  of  Christian  Church,  ii., 
sec.  65).  Although  the  gospel  was  soon  after  propaga- 
ted in  many  parts  of  Europe,  Asia  and  Africa,  there  is 
not  a  particle  of  evidence  to  show  that  any  public  meet- 
ing of  Christians  was  held  for  the  purpose  of  discussing 
any  contested  point  until  the  middle  of  the  second  cen- 
tury. From  that  time  councils  became  frequent;  but  as 
they  consisted  only  of  those  who  belonged  to  particular 
districts  or  countries,  they  are  usually  termed  diocesan, 
provincial,  patriarchal  or  national  councils,  in  contradis- 
tinction to  ecutiienical  or  general  councils,  /.  e.,  supposed 
to  comprise  delegates  or  commissioners  from  all  the 
churches  in  the  Christian  world,  and  consequently  sup- 
posed to  represent  the  Church  universal. 

According  to  Dr.  Schaff,  the  word  ecumenical  occurs 
first  in  the  sixth  canon  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381. 
But  no  such  assembly  was  held,  or  could  be  held,  before 
the  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion  over  the  ruins 
of  paganism  in  the  Roman  Empire.  Their  title  to  rep- 
resent the  whole  Christian  world  is  not  valid.  After  the 
fourth  century  the  "lower  clergy  and  the  laity"  were 
entirely  excluded  from  the  councils,  and  bishops  only 
admitted.     The  number  of  bishops  gathered  at  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


197 


greatest  of  the  councils  constituted  but  a  small  portion 
of  the  number  who  claimed  to  be  bishops.  The  ecu- 
menical councils  which  are  generally  admitted  to  bear 
that  title  most  justly  were  rather  Greek  than  general 
councils.  In  the  strict  and  proper  sense  of  the  term, 
therefore,  no  ecumenical  council  has  ever  been  held. 
There  are  seven  councils  admitted  by  both  the  Greek 
and  Latin  churches  as  ecumenical,  to  which  number  the 
Roman  CathoHcs  add  twelve,  making  nineteen  in  all, 
which  we  now  shall  notice  in  their  regular  historical 
order. 

X.    APOSTOLICAL  COUNCIL. 

This  council  convened  in  Jerusalem,  A.  D.  47,  and, 
according  to  the  meaning  of  the  term,  is  the  only  coun- 
cil mentioned  in  the  New  Testament.  The  conversion 
of  Cornelius  having  thrown  open  the  Church  of  Christ 
to  the  Gentiles,  many  uncircumcised  persons  were  soon 
gathered  into  the  congregation  formed  at  Antioch  under 
the  labors  of  Paul  and  Barnabas ;  but,  on  the  visit  of 
certain  Jewish  Christians  from  Jerusalem,  a  dispute 
arose  as  to  the  admission  of  such  Gentiles  as  had  not 
ev'en  been  proselytes  to  Judaism,  but  were  brought  in 
directly  from  paganism.  To  settle  this  question,  the 
brethren  at  Antioch  deputed  Paul  and  Barnabas,  with 
several  others,  to  lay  the  matter  before  a  general  meet- 
ing of  the  apostles  and  elders  in  the  Jerusalem  congre- 
gation, which  was  the  first  congregation  formed  under 
the  apostles,  and  obtain  their  formal  and  final  decision 
on  a  point  of  so  vital  importance  to  the  progress  of  the 
gospel  in  all  heathen  lands.  On  their  arrival  and  pres- 
entation of  the  subject,  a  similar  opposition  (and  of  a 
heated  character,  as  we  find  from  the  notices  in  Gal.  ii.) 
was  made  by  Christians  formerly  of  the  Pharisaic  party 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


at  the  metropolis ;  so  that  it  was  only  when,  after  con- 
siderable dispute,  Peter  had  rehearsed  his  experience 
with  reference  to  Cornelius,  and  the  signal  results  of 
the  labors  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  among  the  Gentiles 
had  been  recounted,  that  James,  as  president  of  the 
council,  pronounced  in  favor  of  releasing  those  received 
into  the  church  from  the  Gentiles,  without  requiring 
circumcision  or  the  observance  of  the  Mosaic  ceremonial 
law.  This  conclusion  was  generally  assented  to,  and 
promulgated  in  a  regular  authoritative  form,  and  was 
sent  back  to  Antioch  by  Paul  and  Barnabas  by  letter 
message,  to  be  thence  circulated  in  all  the  churches  in 
pagan  countries.  By  the  decision  of  this  council,  the 
faithful  were  commanded  to  abstain  (i)  from  meats 
which  had  been  offered  to  idols  (so  as  not  even  to 
appear  to  countenance  the  worship  of  the  heathen),  (2) 
from  blood  and  strangled  things,  and  (3)  from  fornica- 
tion— the  prevailing  vice  of  the  Gentiles. 

II.    COUNXIL  OF  NICE. 

Two  church  councils  have  been  held  at  Nicsea,  but 
only  the  first  of  these  was  properly  cecumenical,  and  it 
is  regarded  as  the  most  im  portant  of  such  assemblies. 
It  was  convened  by  the  Emperor  Constantine  in  A.  D. 
325.  Along  with  the  imperial  summoning  of  the  coun- 
cil, the  different  bishops  were  proffered  the  service  of 
public  conveyances  for  themselves  and  two  presbyters 
and  three  servants  ;  and  when  the  three  hundred  and 
eighteen  bishops  who  had  complied  with  the  Emperor's 
request  gathered  at  Nice,  the  Emperor  himself  opened 
the  council,  June  19,  in  his  own  palace,  and  its  use  for 
future  sessions  was  afforded  to  this  august  body  of 
ecclesiastics,  as  it  appears  from  the  records  that  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


199 


sessions,  continuing  for  two  months,  were  held  some- 
times at  the  palace,  and  sometimes  at  a  church  or  some 
public  building.  The  Empire,  at  the  time  of  the  call 
of  the  council,  contained  in  all  about  eighteen  hundred 
bishops  (one  thousand  for  the  Greek  provinces,  eight 
hundred  for  the  Latin),  and  of  these,  if  three  hundred 
and  eighteen  attended  as  reported  by  Athanasius  {Ad. 
Apos.,  c.  2.,  et  al.),  Socrates  {Hist.  Eccles.,  bk.  viii.)  and 
Theodoret  {Hist.  Eccles.,  i.  7),  there  were  one-sixth  of 
the  "episcopal  sees"  represented  at  Nice — a  large 
number,  indeed,  if  we  take  into  consideration  the  vast- 
ness  of  the  imperial  realm,  and  the  difficulty  of  travel 
in  those  times.  Including  the  presbyters  and  deacons 
and  other  attendants,  the  number  may  have  amounted 
in  all  to  between  fifteen  hundred  and  two  thousand. 
Most  of  the  Eastern  provinces  were  strongly  repre- 
sented. Besides  a  great  number  of  obscure  mediocri- 
ties, there  were  several  venerable  and  distinguished 
men;  as  e.  g.,  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  who  was  most  emi- 
nent for  learning;  the  "young  archdeacon  Athanasius," 
who  accompanied  the  bishop  Alexander  of  Alexandria, 
and  who  was  noted  for  zeal,  intellect  and  eloquence. 

"Some,  as  confessors,  still  bore  in  their  bodies 
the  marks  of  Christ  from  the  times  of  persecution ; 
Paphantias  of  the  Upper  Thebaid,  Potamon  of  Herak- 
lea,  whose  right  eye  had  been  put  out,  and  Paul  of 
Neo-Cxsarea,  who  had  been  tortured  with  red-hot 
iron  under  Licinius,  and  was  crippled  in  both  his  hands. 
Others  were  distinguished  for  extraordinary  ascetic  holi- 
ness, and  even  for  miraculous  works ;  like  Jacob  of 
Nisibis,  who  spent  years  as  a  hermit  in  forests  and 
caves,  and  lived  like  a  wild  beast  on  roots  and  leaves, 
and  Spyridion  (or  St.  Spiro),  of  Cyprus,  the  patron  of 


200 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUN'CILS. 


the  Ionian  Isles,  who  even  after  his  ordination  remained 
a  simple  shepherd.  The  Latin  Church,  on  the  contrary, 
had  only  seven  delegates;  from  Spain,  Hosius  or  Osius, 
of  Cordova,  the  ablest  and  most  influential  of  the  West- 
ern representatives ;  from  France,  Nicasius  of  Dijon ; 
from  North  Africa,  CiECelian  of  Carthage ;  from  Pan- 
nonia,  Domnus  of  Strido;  from  Italy,  Eustorgias  of 
Milan,  and  Marcus  of  Calabria;  from  Rome,  the  two 
presbyters,  Victor,  or  Vitus,  and  Vincentius,  as  delegates 
of  the  aged  Pope  Sylvester  I.,  who  found  it  impossible 
to  attend  in  person.  A  Persian  bishop,  John,  also,  and 
a  Gothic  bishop,  Theophilus,  the  forerunner  and  teacher 
of  the  Gothic  Bible  translator  Ulfilas,  were  present." 
{McClintock  and  Strongs  Encyclopedia,  vol.  vii.,  p.  44.) 

Various  theories  have  been  propounded  to  explain 
Constantine's  aim  in  calling  this  council.  By  some  it 
is  represented  as  serving  a  political  purpose  (based  on 
Eusebius,  Vita.  Constant,  iii.  4);  by  others  it  is  regarded 
as  intended  to  restore  quiet  to  the  Church  and  unite  all 
its  parties  in  the  great  Trinitarian  question  on  which 
the  Church  was  at  that  time  greatly  divided — there 
existing  three  parties :  one,  which  may  be  called  the 
orthodox  party,  held  firmly  to  the  doctrine  of  the  deity 
of  Christ;  the  second  was  the  Arian  party,  who  regarded 
Christ  as  only  a  man  ;  and  the  third,  which  was  in  the 
majority,  taking  conciliatory  or  middle  ground,  and 
consenting  to  the  use  of  such  christological  expressions 
as  all  parties  could  consistently  agree  upon.  They 
acknowledged  the  divine  nature  of  Christ  in  general 
biblical  terms,  but  avoided  the  use  of  the  term  homoousian 
(which  means  like  substance  with  the  Father),  which  the 
Arians  decried  as  unscriptural,  Sabellian,  and  material- 
istic.    According  to   Pusey,  ' '  Constantine  did  not 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


20 1 


understand  the  doctrine,  and  attached  as  much  or  more 
importance  to  uniformity  in  keeping  Easter  as  to  unity 
of  faith.  Indeed,  he  himself  at  this  ti  re  beHeved  in  no 
doctrine  but  that  of  Providence,  and  spared  no  terms  of 
contempt  as  to  the  pettiness  of  the  dispute  between 
Alexander  and  Arius"  {Councils  of  the  Church,  p.  102); 
yet  it  would  seem  that  Constantine  only  called  a  council 
when  he  believed  it  impossible  to  restore  peace  between 
the  contending  parties,  led  respectively  by  Arius  and 
Alexander,  and  now  turned  over  the  case  for  settlement 
to  the  bishops,  who  appeared  to  him  to  be  the  repre- 
sentatives of  God  and  Christ,  the  organs  of  the  divine 
Spirit  "  that  enlightened  and  guided  the  Church,"  and 
he  appears  to  have  hoped  that  when  in  council  assem- 
bled, analogous  to  the  established  custom  of  deciding 
controversies  in  the  single  provinces  by  assemblies  com- 
posed of  all  the  provincial  bishops,  they  would  be  able 
to  dispose  of  the  present  controversy. 

No  complete  collection  of  the  transactions  of  this 
Nicaean  ecumenical  council  have  come  down  to  us. 
Some  account  of  the  bishops  who  composed  this  assem- 
bly is  given  by  Socrates,  Sozomen  and  Theodoret.  It 
is  uncertain  who  presided,  but  it  is  generally  supposed 
that  the  president  was  Hosius,  bishop  of  Cordova  in 
Spain.  From  the  reports  of  two  of  its  attendants, 
Athanasius  and  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  we  learn  that  it 
busied  itself  mainly  with  the  settlement  of  the  different 
christological  views.  The  opening  sessions  were  prin- 
cipally devoted,  according  to  these  writers,  to  a  consid- 
eration of  Arian  views,  and  resulted  finally  in  the 
examination  of  Arius  himself  He  did  not  hesitate  to 
maintain  that  the  Son  of  God  was  a  creature,  made 
from  nothing ;  that  there  was  a  time  when  he  had  no 


202 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUN'CILS. 


existence  ;  that  he  was  capable  of  his  own  free  will  of 
right  and  wrong.  Athanasius,  although  at  the  time  but 
a  deacon,  drew  the  attention  of  the  whole  council  by 
his  marvelous  penetration  in  unraveling  and  laying  open 
the  artifices  of  the  heretical  views  of  Arius  and  his 
followers.  He  resisted  Eusebius,  Theognis  and  Maris, 
the  chief  supporters  of  Arius,  and  evinced  such  zeal  in 
defense  of  the  truth  that  he  attracted  both  the  admira- 
tion of  all  the  anti-Arian  party  and  the  bitter  hatred  of 
the  Arian  party.  We  are  told  that  so  great  and  far- 
reaching  was  the  influence  of  the  criticism  of  Athana- 
sius, that  many  of  the  Arians  became  doubtful  of  their 
own  standpoint,  and  eighteen  of  them  abandoned  the 
cause  of  Arius.  The  orthodox  party  themselves  became 
enthusiastic  in  behalf  of  their  cause,  and  when  Eusebius 
of  Caesarea  proposed  a  confession  of  faith — an  ancient 
Palestinian  confession,  which  was  very  similar  to  the 
Nicene,  and  acknowledged  the  divine  nature  of  Christ 
in  general  biblical  terms,  but  avoided  the  term  in  ques- 
tion [homooiisios,  of  tJie  same  essence),  they  rejected  it, 
though  the  Emperor  had  seen  and  approved  this  con- 
fession, and  even  the  Arian  minority  were  ready  to 
accept  it  They  wished  a  creed  to  which  no  Arian  could 
honestly  subscribe,  and  especially  insisted  on  inserting 
the  expression  hoino-usios,  which  the  Arians  so  much 
objected  to.  The  fathers  finally  presented  through 
Hosius  of  Cordova  another  confession,  which  became 
the  substance  of  what  is  now  known  and  owned  by  the 
orthodox  churches  as  the  well-known  Nicene  Creed. 
Here  is  the  Nicene  Creed,  as  translated  from  the  Greek, 
and  which  was  adopted  at  the  council  of  Nice  in  325: 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


203 


THE  NICENE  CREED. 

We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  ail  things 
Tisible  and  invisible;  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God 
begotten  of  the  Father ;  only-begotten,  that  is  of  the  substance  of  the 
Father;  God  of  God;  Light  of  Light;  very  God  of  very  God;  begotten, 
not  made;  of  the  same  substance  with  the  Father  ;  by  whom  all  things 
were  made,  both  things  in  heaven  and  things  in  earth  ;  who  for  us 
men  and  our  salvation  descended  and  became  flesli,  was  made  man, 
suffered,  and  rose  again  the  third  day.  He  ascended  into  heaven  ;  he 
cometh  to  judge  the  quick  and  dead.  And  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  But 
those  who  say  there  was  a  time  wJien  he  was  not ;  or  that  he  was  not 
before  he  was  begotten  ;  or  that  he  was  made  from  that  which  had  no 
being;  or  who  affirm  the  Son  of  God  to  be  of  any  other  substance  or 
essence,  or  created,  or  variable,  or  mutable,  such  persons  doth  the 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  anathematize. 

This  creed  was  enlarged  at  the  second  Council  of 
Constantinople,  in  381,  by  which  the  faith  of  the 
Church  with  regard  to  the  person  of  Christ  was  set 
forth  in  opposition  to  certain  errors,  notably  Arianism. 
Moreover,  not  only  the  Semi-Arians,  but  even  many  of 
the  Nicenians  (followers  of  the  Nicene  Creed),  held, 
with  the  Arians,  and  especially  the  Macedonians,  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  was  created  by  the  Father  (Gieseler 
i.  c).  After  ineffectual  attempts,  at  several  synods,  to 
agree  upon  a  formula,  the  Nicene  Symbol,  with  certain 
additions,  was  adopted  in  381,  as  already  stated,  at  the 
second  ecumenical  Council  of  Constantinople.  The 
parts  added  at  Constantinople  are  put  in  brackets.  We 
append  it  below  as  enlarged  : 

(1)  I  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  [of  heaven 
knd  earth],  and  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible.  (2)  And  in  one 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  his 
Father  [before  all  worlds];  [God  of  God];  Light  of  Light  ;  very  God 
of  very  God;  begotten,  not  made;  being  of  one  substance  with  the 
Father,  by  whom  all  things  were  made.  (3)  Who  for  us  men  and  our 
salvation  came  down  from  heaven,  and  was  incarnate  [by  the  Holy 


.204 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


S)>irit  of  the  Virgin  Marr],  and  was  made  man  [and  was  craelfied. 
»]»■',  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate];  he  sufiFered  and  was  buried;  and 
the  tMrd  dav  he  rose  again,  according  to  the  Scriptures ;  and  ascended 
iuio  heaven  [and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father].  And  he 
shall  come  ajain  with  glory  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the  dead 
[whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end].  And  I  believe  in  the  Hoi;.' 
St^irit  [the  Lord  and  Giver  of  Life],  who  proceedeth  from  the  Fatht-r 
[and  the  Son],  who,  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  together  is  worshiped 
aud  glorified ;  who  spake  bj  the  prophets.  And  I  believe  in  one 
tathoiic  and  apostolic  chuxclu  I  acknowledge  one  baptism  for  the 
remission  of  sins,  and  I  look  for  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the 
life  of  the  world  to  come.  Amen. 

The  decision  of  the  council  having  been  laid  before 
Constantine,  he  saw  clearly  that  the  Eusebian  formula 
would  not  pass ;  and  as  he  had  at  heart,  for  the  sake  of 
peace,  the  most  nearly  unanimous  decision  which  was 
possible,  he  gave  his  voice  for  the  disputed  word,  and 
declared  that  he  recognized  in  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  bishops  the  work  of  God,  and  received  it  with 
reverence,  declaring  that  all  those  persons  should  be 
banished  who  refused  to  submit  to  it.  Upon  this  the 
Arians,  through  fear,  also  anathematized  the  dogmas 
condemned,  and  subscribed  the  faith  laid  down  by  the 
council ;  that  they  did  so  only  outwardly  was  shown  by 
their  subsequent  conduct.  It  was  declared  by  its  advo- 
cates that  it  was  presented  after  mature  deliberation, 
and  after  diligent  consultation  of  all  that  the  holy 
evangelists  and  apostles  have  taught  upon  the  subject ; 
and  it  proceeded  to  set  forth  the  true  doctrine  of  the 
Church  in  a  creed,  in  which,  in  order  to  defy  all  the 
subtleties  of  the  Arians  (says  a  modern  "orthodox" 
historian),  the  council  thought  good  to  express  by  the 
term  "  consubstantial  " — honioousios — the  divine  essence 
or  substance  which  is  common  to  the  Father  and  the 
Son.    According  to  Athanasius,  this  creed  was  in  a 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


20$ 


great  measure  composed  by  Hosius,  of  Cordova.  It  was 
written  out  by  Hermogenes,  bishop  of  Caesarea,  in 
Cappadocia,  and  subscribed,  togetlier  with  the  condem- 
nation of  the  dogmas  and  expressions  of  Arius,  by  all 
the  bishops  present  with  the  exception  of  a  few  of  the 
Arians.  Socrates  {lib.  i.,  ch.  5)  says  that  all  the  bishops 
except  five;  Baronius,  that  all  except  Eusebius,  of 
Nicomedia,  and  Theognis,  of  Nicasa,  assented  to  the  use 
of  the  word  oyioouaio' — homoousios.  According  to  Cave, 
Secundus,  of  Ptolemais,  and  Theognis,  of  Marmorica, 
alone  refused.  Arius  himself  was  banished,  by  Con- 
stantine's  order,  to  Illyria,  where  he  remained  until  his 
recall,  which  took  place  five  years  after. 

We  have  now  transcribed  the  chief  acts  of  the  Nicene 
Council;  but  that  our  readers  may  have,  if  possible,  the 
full  benefit  of  the  minor  proceedings  of  "  the  great  and 
holy  council, "  which  "holds  the  highest  place  among 
all  the  councils,"  we  proceed  to  show  what  other  grave 
matters  were  disposed  of  by  these  famous  bishops. 

First.  They  considered  the  subject  of  the  Meletian 
schism,  which  for  some  time  past  had  divided  Egypt, 
and  they  decreed  that  Meletius  should  keep  the  title  and 
rank  of  bishop  in  his  See  of  Lycopolis,  in  Egypt,  forbid- 
ding him,  however,  to  perform  any  episcopal  functions ; 
also,  that  they  whom  he  had  elevated  to  any  ecclesias- 
tical dignities  should  be  admitted  to  communion,  upon 
condition  that  they  should  take  rank  after  those  who 
were  enrolled  in  any  parish  (the  district  under  a  bishop's 
jurisdiction,  which  is  now  called  a  "diocese,"  was  so 
styled  in  the  Church  at  that  time),  and  who  had  been 
ordained  by  Alexander.  Second.  They  decreed  that 
throughout  the  Church,  the  festival  of  Easter  should  be 
celebrated  on  the  Sunday  after  the  full  moon  which 


206 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


happens  next  after  March  21.  Third.  They  published 
twenty  canons  or  rules ;  and  here  they  are  : 

1.  Excludes  from  the  exercise  of  their  functions  those  persona  in 
holy  orders  who  have  made  themselves  eunuchs. 

2.  Forbids  to  raise  neophytes  to  the  priesthood  or  episcopate. 

3.  Forbids  any  bishop,  priest  or  deacon  to  have  women  in  their 
houses,  except  their  mothers,  sisters,  aunts,  or  such  women  as  shall  be 
beyond  the  reach  of  slander. 

4.  Declares  that  a  bishop  ought,  if  possible,  to  be  constituted  by  all 
the  bishops  of  the  province,  but  allows  of  his  consecration  by  three,  at 
least,  with  the  consent  of  the  absent  bishops  signified  in  writing;  the 
consecration  to  be  finally  confirmed  by  the  metropolitan. 

5.  Orders  that  they  who  have  been  separated  from  the  communion 
of  the  Church  by  their  own  bishop  shall  not  be  received  into  commu- 
nion elsewhere.  Also,  that  a  provincial  synod  shall  be  held  twice  a 
year  in  every  province  to  examine  into  sentences  of  excommunication  ; 
one  synod  to  be  held  before  Lent,  and  the  second  in  autumn. 

6.  Insists  upon  the  preservation  of  the  rights  and  privileges  of  the 
bishops  of  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  other  provinces. 

7.  Grants  to  the  bishop  of  ^Elia  (JElia  Capitolina,  the  new  city  built 
by  -/Elius  Hadrianus  upon  the  site  of  Jerusalem,  or  near  it),  according 
to  ancient  tradition,  the  second  place  of  honor. 

8.  Permits  those  who  had  been  ministers  among  I  he  Cathari,  and 
who  returned  into  the  bosom  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church, 
having  received  imposition  of  hands,  to  remain  in  the  ranks  of  the 
clergy.  Directs,  however,  that  they  shall,  in  writing,  make  profession 
to  follow  the  decrees  of  the  Church  ;  and  that  they  shall  communicate 
with  tliose  who  have  married  twice,  and  with  those  who  have  per- 
formed penance  for  relapsing  in  time  of  persecution.  Directs,  further, 
that  in  places  where  there  is  a  Catholic  bishop  and  a  converted  bishop 
of  the  Cathari  (those  pretending  to  peculiar  purity  of  life),  the  former 
shall  retain  his  rank  and  office,  and  the  latter  be  considered  only  as  a 
priest ;  or  the  bishop  may  assign  him  the  place  of  chorepiscopus. 

9.  Declares  to  be  null  and  void  the  ordination  of  priests  made  with- 
out due  inquiry,  and  of  those  who  have,  before  ordination,  confessed 
sins  committed. 

10.  Declares  the  same  of  persons  ordained  priests  in  ignorance,  or 
whose  sin  has  appeared  after  ordination. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


207 


11.  Enacts  that  those  who  have  fallen  away  in  time  of  persecution 
without  strong  temptation  shall  be  three  years  among  the  hearers, 
seven  years  among  the  prostrators,  and  for  two  years  shall  communi- 
cute  witii  the  people  without  offering  ("  Cv);;imunic;:ile  with  the  people 
in  prayer,  without  being  admitted  to  the  oblation  ;  "  i.  e.,  to  the  holy 
eucharist,  according  to  Johnson's  way  of  understanding  it). 

12.  Imposes  ten  years'  penance  upon  any  one  of  the  military,  who, 
having  been  deprived  of  a  post  on  account  of  the  faith,  shall,  after  all, 
give  a  bribe,  and  deny  the  faith,  in  order  to  receive  it  back  again. 

13.  Forbids  to  deny  the  holy  communion  to  any  one  likely  to  die. 

14.  Orders  that  catechumens  who  have  relapsed  shall  be  three  years 
among  the  hearers. 

15.  Forbids  bishops,  priests  or  deacons  to  remove  from  one  city  to 
another  ;  or  any  one  offending  against  this  canon  to  be  compelled  to 
return  to  his  own  church,  and  his  translation  to  be  void. 

16.  Priests  or  deacons  removing  from  their  own  church  not  to  be 
received  into  any  other  ;  those  who  persist,  to  be  separated  from  com-  , 
munion.    If  any  bishop  dare  to  ordain  a  man  belonging  to  another 
church,  the  ordination  to  be  void. 

17.  Directs  that  all  clerks  guilty  of  usury  shall  be  deposed. 

18.  Forbids  deacons  to  give  the  eucharist  to  priests,  and  to  receive 
it  themselves  before  the  priests,  and  to  sit  among  the  priests  ;  offenders 
to  be  deposed. 

19.  Directs  that  Paulianists  coming  over  to  the  Church  shall  be  bap- 
tized again.  Permits  those  among  their  clergy  who  are  without 
reproach,  after  baptism,  to  be  ordained  by  the  Catholic  bishops ; 
orders  the  same  thing  of  deaconesses. 

20.  Orders  that  all  persons  shall  offer  up  their  prayers  on  Sundays 
and  Pentecost,  standing. 

It  was  also  proposed  to  add  another  canon,  enjoining 
continence  upon  the  married  clergy  ;  Paphnutius  warmly 
opposed  the  imposition  of  such  a  yoke,  and  prevailed, 
so  that  the  proposal  fell  to  the  ground.  The  creed  and 
the  canons  were  written  in  a  book,  and  signed  by  the 
bishops.  The  council  issued  a  letter  to  the  Egyptian 
and  Libyan  bishops  as  to  the  decision  of  the  three  main 
points;  the  Emperor  also  sent  several  edicts  to  the 


2o8 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNXILS. 


churches,  in  which  he  ascribed  the  decrees  to  divine 
inspiration,  and  sent  them  forth  as  laws  of  the  realm. 
On  July  29,  the  twentieth  anniversary  of  his  accession, 
the  Emperor  gave  the  members  of  the  council  a  splendid 
banquet  in  his  palace,  which  Eusebius  (quite  too  sus- 
ceptible of  worldly  splendor)  describes  as  a  figure  of  th.e 
reign  of  Christ  on  earth.  Constantine  remunerated  the 
bishops  lavishly,  and  dismissed  them  with  a  suitable 
valedictory,  and  with  letters  of  commendation  to  the 
authorities  of  all  the  provinces  on  their  homeward  way. 

COUNCILS  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. 

The  first  ecumenical  Council  of  Constantinople  was 
convoked  in  this  eastern  city  in  381  by  Theodosius  the 
'  Great.  There  were  present  one  hundred  and  fifty 
"  orthodox  bishops  "  (mostly  eastern)  and  thirty-six  fol- 
lowers of  Macedonius,  who  left  Constantinople  when  his 
doctrine  was  rejected  by  the.  majority.  The  council 
condemned,  besides  the  Macedonians,  the  Arians, 
Unomians  and  Eudoxians,  and  confirmed  the  resolutions 
of  the  Council  of  Nice.  It  assigned  to  the  bishop  of 
Constantinople  the  second  rank  in  the  Church,  next  to 
the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  in  controversies  between  the 
two  reserved  the  decision  to  the  Emperor. 

The  Second  Council  of  Constantinople.  —  This 
council  (the  fifth  in  the  list  of  ecumenical  councils)  was 
held  in  553  on  account  of  the  Three  Chapters  contro- 
versy, by  one  hundred  and  sixty-five  mostly  Oriental 
bishops.  This  council  excommunicated  the  defenders 
of  the  Three  Chapters — Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  Ibas 
and  others,  and  the  Roman  bishop  Vigilius,  who  refused 
to  condemn  the  Three  Chapters  unconditionally. 

Third   Council  of  Constantinople. — This  is  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


209 


sixth  in  the  list  of  ecumenical  councils,  and  was  held 
from  680  to  681  in  the  Trullan  palace,  and  was  attended 
by  two  hundred  and  eighty-nine  bishops,  among  whom 
were  three  Oriental  patriarchs,  and  four  legates  of  the 
Roman  bishop  Agathon.  The  opinions  of  the  Monothe- 
lites  were  condenmed,  especially  through  the  influence 
of  the  Roman  legates,  as  heretical.  The  General  Coun- 
cil convoked  in  691  by  the  Emperor  Justinian  II.,  was 
also  held  in  the  Trullan  palace.  As  it  was  regarded  as 
supplementing  the  fifth  and  sixth  ecumenical  councils, 
ivJiich  Jiad  given  no  church  laws,  it  was  called  Qtdnisexta 
{Synodus)  or  Quinisextuin  {Cojuiliuin).  It  enacted  one 
hundred  and  two  stringent  canons  on  the  morals  of 
clergymen  and  ecclesiastical  discipline.  It  is  recognized 
as  an  ecumenical  council  by  the  Greeks  only. 

Fifth  Council  of  Constantinople. —This  assembled 
in  754,  and  was  attended  by  three  hundred  and  eighty- 
three  bishops.  It  passed  resolutions  against  the  vener- 
ation of  images,  which  were  repealed  by  the  second 
ecumenical  council  of  Nice.  It  is  not  recognized  by 
the  Latin  Church,  but  only  by  the  Greek  Church. 

Sixth  Council  of  Constantinople. — This  was  held  in 
869,  and  by  the  Church  of  Rome  is  regarded  as  the 
fourth  ecumenical  council  of  Constantinople,  or  the 
eighth  in  the  list  of  ecumenical  councils.  It  deposed 
the  patriarch  Photius,  restored  the  patriarch  Ignatius, 
and  enacted  laws  on  church  discipline.  It  is,  of  course, 
not  recognized  by  the  Greek  or  Eastern  Church.  In  879 
another  General  Synod  was  held  at  Constantinople, 
attended  by  three  hundred  and  eighty  bishops,  among 
whom  were  the  legates  of  Pope  John  VIII.  Photius 
was  recalled,  the  resolutions  of  the  preceding  council 
against  him  repealed,  and  the  position  of  the  patriarch 
IS 


2IO 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


of  Constantinople  to  the  Pope  defined.  The  Greeks 
number  this  as  the  eighth  ecumenical  council.  The 
nintli  ecumenical  council  of  the  Greek  Church  was  held 
in  Constantinople,  under  the  Emperor  Adronicus  the 
Younger,  in  1341.  It  condemned  the  opinions  of  Bar- 
laam  as  heretical. 

Particular  Synods. — The  most  important  of  the 
particular  synods  are:  i.  and  2.  In  336  and  339,  two 
Arian  synods,  under  the  leadership  of  Eusebius,  of 
Nicomedia.  The  former  deposed  and  excommunicated 
Marcellus,  of  Ancyra ;  the  latter  deposed  and  expelled 
Bishop  Paulus,  of  Constantinople,  and  appointed  Euse- 
bius his  successor.  3.  A  Semi-Arian  Synod  against 
.^tius,  who  was  banished.  4.  In  426,  a  synod  held 
against  the  Messalians ;  in  418,  449  and  450,  synods 
against  the  Eutychians.  5.  In  495  and  496,  Eutychian 
synods,  condemning  their  opponents,  and  recognizing 
Henoticotf,  of  Geno.  6.  A  synod,  in  516,  condemned 
the  resolutions  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon.  7.  In  536, 
against  Severus,  Anthimus,  and  other  chiefs  of  the 
Acephali.  8.  In  541  (543?),  against  some  views  of 
Origen.  9.  In  815,  two  synods  on  the  question  of 
veneration  of  images;  the  one,  attended  by  two  hundred 
and  seventy  bishops,  in  favor,  and  the  second  against 
the  images.  10.  In  861,  introducing  the  patriarch  Pho- 
tius,  and  approving  the  veneration  of  images.  11.  In 
1 170  (according  to  others,  1168),  a  synod,  attended  by 
many  Eastern  and  Western  bishops,  on  the  reunion  of 
the  Eastern  and  Latin  churches.  Similar  synods  were 
held  in  1277,  1280,  1285,  all  without  effect.  12.  In 
1450,  a  council  convoked  by  the  Emperor  Constantine 
Palaeologus  deposed  the  patriarch  Gregory,  put  in  his 
place  the  patriarch  Athanasius,  and  declined  to  accept 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


211 


the  resolutions  passed  by  the  council  of  Florence  in 
favor  of  the  union  of  the  Greek  and  the  Latin  churches. 
13.  In  1638  and  1643,  two  synods  held  against  the 
crypto-Calvinism  of  the  patriarch  Cyril  Lucaris. 

GENERAL  COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS. 

The  third  ecumenical  council,  convoked  by  the  em- 
peror Theodosius  II.,  was  held  at  Ephesus  in  431,  upon 
the  controversy  raised  by  Nestorius,  bishop  of  Constan- 
tinople, who  objected  to  the  application  of  the  title  of 
^£orox(>r*  (theotokos)  to  the  Virgin  Mary.  Celestine, 
the  Pope,  not  seeing  fit  to  attend  in  person,  sent  three 
legates,  Arcadius  and  Projectus,  bishops,  and  Philip,  a 
priest.  Among  the  first  who  arrived  at  the  council  was 
Nestorius,  with  a  numerous  body  of  followers,  and 
accompanied  by  Irenaeus,  a  nobleman,  his  friend  and 
protector.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  also,  and  Juvenal  of 
Jerusalem  came,  accompanied  by  about  fifty  of  the 
Egyptian  bishops;  Memnon  of  Ephesus  had  brought 
together  about  forty  of  the  bishops  within  his  jurisdic- 
tion ;  and  altogether  more  than  two  hundred  bishops 
were  present.  Candidianus,  the  commander  of  the 
forces  of  Ephesus,  attended,  by  order  of  the  Emperor, 
to  keep  peace  and  order;  but  by  his  conduct  he  greatly 
favored  the  party  of  Nestorius.  The  day  appointed  for 
the  opening  of  the  council  was  June  7;  but  John  of 
Antioch,  and  the  other  bishops  from  Syria  and  the  East 
not  having  arrived,  it  was  delayed  till  the  22d  of  the  same 
month.  At  the  first  session  of  the  council  (June  22), 
before  the  Greek  and  Syrian  bishops  had  arrived,  Cyril 
and  the  bishops  present  condemned  the  doctrines  of 
Nestorius,  and  deposed  and  excommunicated  him.  This 


•  The  offspring  of  God. 


212 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNXILS. 


sentence  was  signed  by  one  hundred  and  ninety-eight 
bishops,  according  to  Tillemont,  and  by  more  than  two 
hundred  according  to  Fleury;  it  was  immediately  made 
known  to  Nestorius,  and  published  in  the  public  places. 
At  the  same  time,  notice  of  the  act  was  sent  to  the 
clergy  and  to  the  people  of  Constantinople,  with  a 
recommendation  to  them  to  secure  the  property  of  the 
Church  for  the  successor  of  the  deprived  Nestorius.  As 
soon,  however,  as  Nestorius  had  received  notice  of  this 
sentence,  he  protested  against  it,  and  all  that  had  passed 
at  the  council,  and  forwarded  to  the  Emperor  an 
account  of  what  had  been  done,  setting  forth  that  Cyril 
and  Memnon,  refusing  to  wait  for  John  and  the  other 
bishops,  had  hurried  matters  on  in  a  tumultuous  and 
irregular  way.  On  the  27th  of  June,  twenty-seven 
Syrian  bishops  arrived,  chose  John  of  Antioch  for  their 
president,  and  deposed  Cyril  in  their  turn.  In  August, 
Count  John,  who  had  been  sent  by  Theodosius,  arrived 
at  Ephesus,  and  directed  the  bishops  of  both  synods  to 
meet  him  on  the  following  day.  Accordingly,  John  of 
Antioch  and  Nestorius  attended  with  their  party,  and 
Cyril  with  the  orthodox ;  but  immediately  a  dispute 
arose  between  them;  the  latter  contending  that  Nestorius 
.should  not  be  present,  while  the  former  wished  to 
exclude  Cyril.  Upon  this,  the  Count,  to  quiet  the 
dispute,  gave  both  Cyril  and  Nestorius  into  custody, 
and  then  endeavored,  but  in  vain,  to  reconcile  the  two 
parties.  And  thus  matters  seemed  as  far  from  settle- 
ment as  ever.  The  Emperor  at  last  permitted  the  fathers 
of  the  council  to  send  to  him  eight  deputies,  while  the 
Orientals  or  Syrians,  on  their  part,  sent  as  many.  The 
place  of  meeting  was  at  Chalcedon,  whither  the  Emperor 
proceeded,  and  spenc  five  days  in  listening  to  the  argu- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


•ments  on  both  sides  ;  and  here  the  Council  of  Ephesus 
may,  in  fact,  be  said  to  have  terminated.  Nothing  is 
known  of  what  pa=,scd  at  Chalcedon,  but  the  event 
shows  that  Theodosius  sided  with  the  CathoHcs,  since 
upon  his  return  to  Constantinople  he  ordered,  by  a 
letter,  the  Catholic  deputies  to  come  there,  and  to  pro- 
ceed to  consecrate  a  bishop  in  the  place  of  Nestorius, 
whom  he  had  already  ordered  to  leave  Ephesus,  and  to 
confine  Jiimself  to  his  monastery  near  Antioch.  After- 
ward he  directed  that  all  the  bishops  at  the  council, 
including  Cyril  and  Memnon,  should  return  to  their 
respective  dioceses.  The  judgment  of  this  council  was 
at  once  approved  by  the  whole  Western  Church,  and  by 
far  the  greater  part  of  the  East,  and  was  subsequently 
confirmed  by  the  Ecumenical  Council  of  Chalcedon, 
consisting  of  six  hundred  and  thirty  bishops.  Even 
John  of  Antioch  and  the  Eastern  bishops  very  soon 
acknowledged  it.  But  Nestorius  protested  to  the  last 
that  he  did  not  hold  the  heretical  opinions  anathematized 
by  the  council. 

Of  the  other  Councils  of  Ephesus,  the  following  are 
all  that  need  to  be  mentioned:  i.  In  245  (?)  against  the 
Patropassian  Noetus ;  2.  In  400,  under  Chrysostom, 
where  Heraclidus  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Ephesus, 
and  six  simoniacal  bishops  deposed;  and  the  ''Robber 
Council,''  the  details  of  which  it  is  unnecessary  to  give. 

COUNCIL  OF  CH.\LCEDON. 

This  (the  fourth  ecumenical  council)  was  held  in  451, 
and  was  convoked  by  the  Emperor  Marcianus,  at  the 
request  of  the  bishops  (especially  of  Leo  I.)  to  put  down 
the  Eutychian  and  Nestorian  heresies.  The  Emperor 
had  first  summoned  the  bishops  to  meet  at  Nicaea,  bu 


214 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


when  the  time  approached  he  was  prevented  by  political 
troubles  from  going  so  far  from  the  Imperial  City,  and 
therefore  changed  the  place  of  meeting  to  Chalcedon,  in 
Bithynia,  on  the  Bosphorus,  opposite  Constantinople. 
The  council  was  attended  by  six  hundred  and  thirty 
bishops  and  deputies,  all  Eastern  except  four  legates 
sent  by  Leo  I.  from  Rome.  The  sessions  began  Octo- 
ber 8,  451,  and  ended  October  21.  As  the  two  parties 
in  the  council  were  roused  to  the  highest  pitch  of  pas- 
sion, the  proceedings,  especially  during  the  early  ses- 
sions, were  very  tumultuous,  until  the  lay  commissioners 
and  senators  had  to  urge  the  bishops  to  keep  order, 
saying  that  such  ex^orjasc-:  dr^uor'.yju  (vulgar  outcries) 
were  disgraceful.  (Mansi,  as  quoted  by  Stanley,  East- 
em  Church,  lect.  ii.,  p.  165.) 

At  the  jirst  session  (October  8,  45  i)  the  council  assem- 
bled in  the  church  of  St.  Euphemia  ;  in  the  center  sat 
the  officers  of  the  Emperor ;  at  their  left,  or  on  the  epis- 
tle side,  sat  the  bishops  of  Constantinople,  Antioch, 
Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  and  of  the  other  Eastern  dio- 
ceses, and  Pontus,  Asia  and  Thrace,  together  with  the 
four  legates  ;  on  the  other  side  were  Dioscurus,  Juvenal, 
Thalassius  of  Caesarea,  and  the  other  bishops  of  Egypt, 
Palestine  and  Illyria,  most  of  whom  had  been  present  in 
the  pseudo-council  of  Ephesus.  In  the  midst  were  the 
holy  gospels,  placed  upon  a  raise^l  seat.  When  they 
had  taken  their  seats,  the  legates  of  the  Pope  demanded 
that  Dioscurus  should  withdraw  from  the  assembly, 
accusing  him  of  his  scandalous  conduct  at  Ephesus,  and 
declaring  that  otherwise  they  would  depart.  Then  the 
imperial  officers  ordered  him  to  withdraw  from  the  coun- 
cil, and  to  take  his  seat  among  the  accused.  The  acts 
of  the  so  called  "Robber  Council"  of  Ephesus  were 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


215 


discussed  and  condemned,  and  Dioscurus  was  left  with 
only  twelve  bishops  to  stand  by  him.  The  Eutychian 
heresy,  that  in  our  Lord  were  two  natures  before  his 
incarnation,  and  but  one  afterward,  was  anathematized. 
The  majority  of  the  assembled  bishops  then  proceeded 
to  anathematize  Dioscurus  himself,  and  demanded  that 
he,  together  with  Juvenal  of  Jerusalem,  Thalassius  of 
Caesarea,  Eusebius  of  Ancyra,  Eustachius  of  Berytus, 
and  Basil  of  Seleucia,  who  had  presided  at  the  council, 
should  be  deposed  from  the  episcopate. 

At  the  second  session  (October  10)  the  following  expo- 
sition of  faith,  substantially  taken  from  a  letter  of  Leo 
to  Flavianus,  was  approved,  and  its  opponents  anathe- 
matized :  "The  divine  nature  and  the  human  nature, 
each  remaining  perfect,  have  been  united  in  one  person, 
to  the  intent  that  the  same  Mediator  might  die,  being 
yet  immortal  and  impeccable.  *  *  *  Neither 
nature  is  altered  by  the  other ;  he  who  is  truly  God  is 
also  truly  man.  *  *  *  T\\g  Word  and  the 
flesh  preserve  each  its  proper  functions.  Holy  Scrip- 
ture proves  equally  the  verity  of  the  two  natures.  He 
is  God,  since  it  is  written,  '  In  the  beginning  was  the 
Word,  and  the  Word  zvas  God.'  He  is  also  7Han,  since 
it  is  written,  'The  Word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt 
among  us. '  As  man,  he  was  tempted  by  the  devil  ;  as 
God,  he  is  ministered  unto  by  angels.  As  man,  he 
wept  over  the  tomb  of  Lazarus ;  as  God,  he  raised  him 
from  the  dead.  As  man,  he  is  nailed  to  the  cross  ;  as 
God,  he  makes  all  nature  tremble  at  his  death.  It  is  by 
reason  of  the  unity  of  tl:  t  person  that  we  say  that  the 
Son  of  man  came  down  from  heaven,  and  that  the  Son 
of  God  was  crucified  and  buried,  although  he  was  so 
only  as  to  his  human  nature." 


2l6 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


At  the  third  session  the  deposition  of  Dioscurus  was 
pronounced  irrevocable,  and,  soon  after,  he  wzis  ban' 
ished  to  Gangra,  in  Paphlagonia,  where,  in  the  course 
of  three  years,  he  died. 

In  the  fifth  session  the  following  formula  of  faith,  on 
the  question  at  issue,  was  adopted :  "We  confess,  and 
with  one  accord  teach,  one  and  the  same  Son,  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  perfect  in  the  divinity,  perfect  in  the 
humanity,  truly  God  and  truly  man,  consisting  of  a  rea- 
sonable soul  and  body ;  consubstantial  with  the  Father 
according  to  the  Godhead,  and  consubstantial  with  us 
according  to  the  manhood ;  in  all  things  like  unto  us, 
sin  only  excepted ;  who  was  begotten  of  the  Father 
before  all  ages,  according  to  the  Godhead ;  and  in  the 
last  days,  the  same  was  born  according  to  the  manhood, 
of  Mary  the  Virgin,  mother  of  God,  for  us  and  for  our 
salvation ;  who  is  to  be  acknowledged  one  and  the  same 
Christ,  the  Son,  the  Lord,  the  only  begotten  in  two 
natures,  without  mixture,  change,  division  or  separation  ; 
the  difference  of  natures  not  being  removed  by  their 
union,  but  rather  the  propriety  of  each  nature  being 
preserved,  and  concurring  in  one  person  and  in  one 
unoaraatz,  so  that  he  is  not  divided  or  separated  into 
two  persons,  but  the  only  Son,  God,  the  Word,  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  one  and  the  same  person."  At  the 
later  sessions  (ix.-xv.),  a  number  of  questions  of  order, 
supremacy,  discipline,  etc.,  were  settled.  But  by  far 
the  most  important  was  the  twenty-eighth  canon,  session 
XV.,  by  which  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  was 
placed  on  equality  of  authority  with  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  saving  only  to  the  latter  priority  of  honor.  The 
Roman  delegates  protested  against  this,  and,  after  its 
adoption,  T  ,eo  constantly  opposed  it,  upon  the  plea  that 


REFOKMATOKY  MOVEMENTS. 


217 


it  contradicted  the  sixth  of  Nicaea,  which  assigned  the 
second  place  in  dignity  to  Alexandria ;  however,  in 
spite  of  his  opposition  and  that  of  his  successors,  the 
canon  remained  and  was  executed.  The  acts  of  this 
council  in  Greek,  with  the  exception  of  the  anathemas, 
are  lost. 

THE  SECOND  COUNCIL  OF  NICE. 

This  is  called  the  seventh  ecumenical  council,  though 
falsely  so,  as  some  assert.  It  assembled  August  17,  786, 
by  order  of  the  Empress  Irene  and  her  son  Constantine. 
Owing  to  the  tumults  raised  by  the  Iconoclastic  party, 
it  was  dissolved  and  reconvened  on  September  24,  787. 
(Theophanes,  who  was  present,  says  that  the  opening 
of  the  council  was  made  on  October  11.)  There  were 
present  three  hundred  and  seventy-five  bishops  from 
Greece,  Thrace,  Natolia,  the  Isles  of  the  Archipelago, 
Sicily  and  Italy.  Pope  Hadrian  and  all  the  Oriental 
patriarchs  sent  legates  to  represent  them  in  the  synod, 
those  of  Rome  taking  the  first  place  ;  two  commissioners 
from  the  Emperor  and  Empress  also  assisted  at  it.  The 
causes  which  led  to  the  assembling  of  this  council  were 
briefly  as  follows :  The  Emperor  Leo  (and  afterward  his 
son  Constantine  Copronymus),  offended  at  the  excess  of 
veneration  often  offered  to  the  images  of  Christ  and  the 
saints,  made  a  decree  against  the  use  of  images  in  any 
way,  and  caused  them  everywhere  to  be  removed  and 
destroyed.  These  severe  and  summary  proceedings 
raised  an  opposition  almost  as  violent,  and  both  the 
patriarch  of  Constantinople  (Germanus)  and  the  Pope 
(Hadrian)  defended  the  use  of  images,  declaring  them 
to  have  been  always  in  use  in  the  churches,  and  showing, 
or  attempting  to  show,  the  difference  between  absolute 
and  relative  worship.    However,  in  a  council  assembled 


2l8 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


at  Constantinople  in  754,  composed  of  three  hundred 
and  thirty-eight  bishops,  a  decree  was  pubHshed  against 
the  use  of  images.  But  at  this  time  Constantine  Copro- 
nymus  died,  and  Tarasius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople, 
induced  the  Empress  Irene  and  her  son  .Constantine  to 
convoke  this  council,  in  which  the  decrees  of  the  coun- 
cil of  754  at  Constantinople  were  set  aside. 

The  first  session  was  held  in  the  church  of  St.  Sophia. 
Tarasius,  the  patriarch,  spoke  first,  and  exhorted  the 
bishops  to  reject  all  novelties,  and  to  cling  to  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  Church.  After  this,  ten  bishops  were 
brought  before  the  council,  accused  of  following  the 
party  of  the  Iconoclasts  (image-breakers) — three  of 
whom,  Basil  of  Ancyra,  Theodore  of  Myra,  and  Theo- 
dosius  of  Amorium,  recanted,  and  declared  that  they 
received  with  all  honor  the  relics  and  sacred  images  of 
Jesus  Christ,  the  blessed  Virgin,  and  the  saints ;  upon 
which  they  were  permitted  to  take  their  seats ;  the 
others  were  remanded  to  the  next  session.  The  forty- 
second  of  the  apostolic  canons,  and  the  eighth  of  the 
Nicaea,  and  other  canons  relating  to  the  reception  of 
converted  heretics,  were  read. 

In  the  second  session,  the  letters  of  Pope  Hadrian  to 
the  Empress  and  to  the  patriarch  Tarasius  were  read. 
The  latter  then  declared  his  entire  concurrence  in  the 
view  taken  of  the  question  by  the  bishop  of  Rome,  viz. : 
that  images  are  to  be  adored  with  a  ''relative  worship," 
reserving  to  God  alone  faith  and  the  worship  of  Latria. 
This  opinion  was  warmly  applauded  by  the  whole 
council. 

In  the  third  session,  the  confession  of  Gregory  of  Neo- 
Cicsarea,  the  leader  of  the  Iconoclast  party,  was  received, 
and  declared  by  the  council  to  be  satisfactory ;  where- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


219 


Upon  he  was,  after  some  discussion,  admitted  to  take  his 
seat,  and  with  him  the  bishops  mentioned  above.  Then 
the  letters  of  Tarasius  to  the  patriarchs  of  Alexandria, 
Antioch  and  Jerusalem,  and  their  replies,  as  well  as  the 
confession  of  Theodore  of  Jerusalem,  were  read  and 
approved.  The  passages  of  Holy  Scripture  relating  to 
the  cherubim  which  overshadowed  the  ark  of  the  cov- 
enant, and  which  ornamented  the  interior  of  the  temple, 
were  read,  together  with  other  passages  taken  from  the 
fathers,  showing  that  God  had,  in  other  days,  worked 
miracles  by  means  of  images. 

In  the  fifth  session,  the  patriarch  Tarasius  endeavored 
to  show  that  the  innovators,  in  their  attempts  to  destroy 
all  images,  were  following  in  the  steps  of  the  Jews, 
pagans,  Manichaeans,  and  other  heretics.  The  council 
then  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  images  should  be 
restored  to  their  usual  places,  and  be  carried  in  proces- 
sions as  before. 

In  the  sixth  session,  the  refutation  of  the  definition 
of  faith,  made  in  the  council  of  Iconoclasts  at  Constan- 
tinople, was  read.  They  had  there  declared  that  the 
eucharist  was  the  only  image  allowed  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ ;  but  the  fathers  of  the  present  synod,  in  their 
refutation,  maintained  that  the  eucharist  is  nowhere 
spoken  of  as  the  image  of  our  Lord's  body,  but  as  the 
very  body  itself.  After  this,  the  fathers  replied  to  the 
passages  from  Holy  Scripture  and  from  the  fathers 
which  the  Iconoclasts  had  adduced  in  support  of  their 
views,  and,  in  doing  so,  insisted  chiefly  upon  perpetual 
tradition  and  the  infallibility  of  the  Church. 

In  the  seventh  session  a  definition  of  faith  was  read, 
which  was  to  this  effect :  "We  decide  that  the  holy 
images,  whether  painted  or  graven,  or  of  whatever  kind 


220 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


they  may  be,  ought  to  be  exposed  to  view — whether  in 
churches,  upon  sacred  vessels  and  vestments,  upon 
walls,  or  in  private  houses,  or  by  the  wayside  ;  since  the 
oftener  Jesus  Christ,  his  blessed  mother,  and  the  saints 
are  seen  in  their  images,  the  more  will  man  be  led  to 
think  of  the  originals,  and  to  love  them.  Salutation 
and  the  adoration  of  honor  ought  to  be  paid  to  images, 
but  not  the  worship  of  Latria  (adoration  due  to  God 
alone),  which  belongs  to  God  alone ;  nevertheless,  it  is 
lawful  to  burn  lights  before  them,  and  to  incense  them, 
as  is  usually  done  with  the  cross,  the  books  of  the  gos- 
pels, and  other  sacred  things,  according  to  the  pious  use 
of  the  ancients ;  for  honor  so  paid  to  the  image  is  trans- 
mitted to  the  original  which  it  represents.  Such  is  the 
doctrine  of  the  holy  fathers  and  the  tradition  of  the 
Catholic  Church ;  and  we  order  that  they  who  dare  to 
think  or  teach  otherwise,  if  bishops  or  other  clerks,  shall 
be  deposed;  if  monks  or  laymen,  shall  be  excommuni- 
cated. "  This  decree  was  signed  by  the  legates  and  all 
the  bishops. 

Another  session  (not  recognized  either  by  Greeks  or 
Latins)  was  held  at  Constantinople,  to  which  place  the 
bishops  had  been  cited  by  the  Empress  Irene,  who  was 
present,  with  her  son  Constantine,  and  addressed  the 
assembly.  The  decree  of  the  council  and  the  passages 
from  the  fathers  read  at  Nicaea  were  repeated,  and  the 
former  was  again  subscribed.  The  council  of  Constan- 
tinople against  image-worship  was  anathematized,  and 
the  memory  of  Germanus  of  Constantinople,  John  of 
Damascus,  and  George  of  Cyprus,  held  up  to  veneration. 
Twenty-two  canons  of  discipline  were  published. 

No.  I  insists  upon  the  proper  observation  of  the 
canons  of  the  Church. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


221 


No.  2  forbids  to  consecrate  those  who  do  not  knoW 
the  psalter,  and  will  not  promise  to  observe  the  canons. 

No.  3  forbids  princes  to  elect  bJehops 

No.  7  forbids  to  consecrate  any  church  or  altar  in 
which  relics  are  not  contained. 

No.  14  forbids  those  who  are  not  ordained  to  read  in 
the  synaxis  from  the  Ambon. 

Nos.  15  and  16  forbid  plurality  of  benefices,  and  lux- 
ury in  dress  among  the  clergy. 

No.  20  forbids  double  monasteries,  for  men  and 
women. 

This  council  was  not  for  a  long  period  recognized  in 
France.  The  grounds  upon  which  the  French  bishops 
opposed  it  are  contained  in  the  celebrated  Caroline 
Books,  written  by  order  of  Charlemagne.  Their  chief 
objections  were  these:  i.  That  no  Western  bishops, 
except  the  Pope,  by  his  legates,  were  present ;  2.  That 
the  decision  was  contrary  to  their  custom,  which  was  to 
use  images,  but  not  in  any  way  to  worship  them;  3. 
That  the  council  was  not  assembled  from  all  parts  of  the 
Church,  nor  was  its  decision  in  accordance  with  that  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  The  Caroline  Books  were  answered 
by  Pope  Adrian,  but  with  little  effect,  so  far  as  the 
Gallican  Church  was  concerned,  which  continued  long 
after  this  to  reject  this  council  in  toto. 

LATER  AN  COUNCILS. 

Lateran  Councils  is  a  general  name  applied  to  the 
ecclesiastical  councils  that  have  been  convened  in  the 
Lateran  Church  at  Rome,  but  especially  to  the  five 
great  councils  held  there,  and  regarded  by  the  Roman 
Catholics  as  ecumenical,  viz.:  those  which  were  held  in 
the  years  11 23,  11 39,  1179,   121 5  and  15 12-17. 


222 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


have  only  room  to  notice  the  most  important  of  all  these 
councils,  and  that  with  reference  to  their  principal 
enactments  and  historical  connections. 

I.  The  council  of  649,  under  Martin  I.,  condemned 
the  Monothelitic  doctrine,  or  that  of  o)ic  will  in  the  per- 
son of  Christ.  This  view  was  developed  as  a  continua- 
tion of  the  Monophysite  controversy.  The  council  of 
Chalcedon,  in  451,  had  affirmed  the  existence  of  two 
natures  in  Christ  in  one  person,  against  the  Antiochians, 
the  Nestorians  and  Eutychians.  This  determination  of 
the  council  did  not  obtain  final  supremacy  in  the  Greek 
and  Latin  Churches  till  after  the  time  of  Justinian,  and 
the  conflict  with  it  was  continued  under  various  forms. 
From  the  council  of  Chalcedon  till  that  of  Frankfort,  in 
793,  the  church  councils,  especially,  sought  to  maintain 
the  twofoldness  of  the  nature  of  Christ  asserted  at 
Chalcedon,  with  less  regard  to  the  unity,  which  was  at 
the  same  time  established.  An  early  source  for  the  rist- 
of  Monothelitism  appeared  in  the  writings  of  PseudM 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  which,  originating  in  the 
fourth  century,  probably  obtained  for  many  centuries 
thereafter  great  credit  in  the  Church,  A  Neo-Platonic 
mysticism  in  these  writings  seeks  to  mediate  between 
the  prevalent  church  doctrine  and  Monophysitism  (or 
the  doctrine  of  one  nature  in  Christ).  "The  Areopagite 
is  not  an  outspoken  Monophysite,  and  yet  with  him  the 
human  in  Christ  is  only  a  form  of  the  divine,  and  there 
is  in  all  the  acts  of  Christ  but  one  mode  of  operation,  the 
theandric  energy"  {inia  theandrikee  henergeid).  This 
expression  became  a  favorite  one  with  all  the  Monophy- 
site opponents  of  the  Chalcedonian  decisions. 

The  Monothelitic  controversy  proper  extends  from 
623  to  680,  at  which  latter  date  the  synod  of  Constan 


REFORMATORY  MOVI£MENTS. 


223 


tinople  gave  the  most  precise  definition  of  two  wills  in 
the  nature  of  Christ.  ' '  The  earh'er  sta^je  of  the  contro- 
versy, extending  to  the  year  63S,  concerns  rather  the 
question  of  one  or  two  energies  or  inodis  of  ivorking  in 
the  acts  of  Christ."  The  Emperor  Hcraclius,  on  the 
occasion  of  his  reconquering  the  Eastern  provinces  from 
"the  Persians  in  the  year  622,  and  there  coming  in  con- 
tact with  certain  Monophysite  bishops,  conceived  the 
idea  of  reconciUng  them  to  the  Church,  by  authorizing 
the  expression  in  reference  to  the  acts  of  Christ  which 
was  used  by  Dionysius.  Sergius,  patriarch  of  Constan- 
tinople, being  consulted,  admitted  the  propriety  of  the 
expression  as  one  sanctioned  by  the  fathers,  and  recom- 
mended it  to  Cyrus,  bishop  of  Phasis,  who,  being  made 
soon  after  bishop  of  Alexandria,  set  up  a  compromise 
for  the  Monophysites  with  the  council  of  Chalcedon  on 
nine  points.  Sophronius,  a  monk  of  Alexandria,  seri- 
ously objected  to  the  course  taken  by  Sergius,  and,  on 
being  made  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  became  so  strong  an 
opponent  that  Sergius  called  to  his  aid  the  influence  of 
Honorius,  bishop  of  Rome,  who  expressed  himself  in 
favor  of  the  view,  "rather'one  will  than  of  one  opera- 
tion," but  advised  that  controversy  be  avoided.  "It  is 
unquestionably  the  fact  that  the  expressed  views  of 
Honorius,  though  a  Pope,  were  subsequently  condemned 
in  council. "  By  occasion  of  the  more  decided  opposi- 
tion of  Sophronius,  the  Emperor  Heraclius,  under 
advice  of  Sergius,  issued  his  edict,  the  Ecthesis,  in  638, 
in  which  he  forbade  the  use  of  either  expression,  "one 
mode  of  working,"  or  "two  modes  of  working,"  in  a 
controversial  way ;  but  especially  prohibited  the  latter, 
since  it  is  evident  that  Christ  can  have  but  one  will,  the 
human  being  subordinate  to  the  divine.    This  was  dis- 


224 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


tinct  Monothelitism.  A  powerful  opponent  of  this  view 
was  the  monk  Maximus,  whose  writings  had  a  control- 
ling influence  with  the  Lateran  Counci'.  "  He  asserts 
that  for  the  work  of  redemption  a  completeness  in  the 
two  natures  of  Christ  is  necessary;  there  must  be  a 
complete  human  will.  The  Logos,  indeed,  works  all 
through  the  human  working  and  willing.  There  is  a 
theandric  energy  in  his  own  sense.  It  is  rather  as  a 
tropes  antidoseos,  or  what  was  subsequently  called  the 
communicatio  idiomatum. " 

Maximus  worked  with  great  zeal  against  Monothe- 
litism in  Rome  and  in  Africa,  sending  out  thence  tracts 
on  the  subject  into  the  Eastern  countries.  Sophronius 
still  carried  on  the  controversy,  as  also,  with  him, 
Stephen,  bishop  of  Doria,  his  pupil.  After  the  death 
of  Honorius,  in  638,  the  bishops  of  Rome  were  decid- 
edly opposed  to  Monothelitism,  and  Martin  I.,  who  had 
zealously  contended  against  the  view  while  representa- 
tive of  the  Roman  Church  at  Constantinople,  became, 
when  made  Pope  in  649,  the  chief  pillar  of  the  contrary 
opinion.  Advocates  of  the  view  enunciated  in  the 
Ecthcsis  of  Heraclius  were  Theodore,  bishop  of  Phasan, 
and  Pyrrhus,  of  Constantinople.  In  638,  the  Emperor 
Constans  II.,  under  the  influence  of  the  patriarch  Paul, 
issued  his  Type  (ryrroc  rriarso;),  which,  though  not  so 
decidedly  Monothelitic  as  the  Ecthesis,  condemns,  under 
threat  of  the  severest  penalties,  any  further  controversy 
upon  the  subject.  Without  consulting  the  Emperor, 
Martin  I.  now  convoked  this  first  Lateran  Council,  in 
which  he  presided  over  about  one  hundred  and  four 
bishops  from  Italy,  Sicily,  Sardinia  and  Africa.  The 
Pope  sought  to  obtain  generally  recognition  for  the 
council,  and  it  was  finally  everywhere  received  with  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


225 


five  ecumenical  councils.  Five  sessions  were  held  ;  the 
writings  of  the  prominent  Monothelites  were  examined 
and  condemned ;  Pope  Martin  explained  the  proper 
meaning  of  Dionysius'  term  "theandric  operation," 
stating  that  it  was  designed  to  signify  two  operations  of 
one  person ;  the  Ecthesis  of  Heraclius  and  Type  of  Con- 
stans  were  condemned  ;  and  the  judgment  of  the  council 
pronounced  in  twenty  canons,  which  "anathematize  all 
who  do  not  confess  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  two  wills 
and  two  operations. " 

II.  The  councils  of  1 105,  1 1 12  and  1 1 16,  under  Pascal 
II.,  concern  the  contest  about  investitures  between  the 
Pope  and  the  Emperor,  which  was  brought  to  a  close  in 
the  council  of  1 123,  called  and  presided  over  by  Calix- 
tus  II.  This  body  consisted  of  three  hundred  bishops 
and  six  hundred  abbots,  all  of  the  Latin  Church.  The 
investiture  contest,  which  began  as  early  as  1054,  when, 
by  mutual  degrees  of  excommunication,  the  breach 
between  the  Eastern  and  Western  Churches  was  made 
final,  arose  from  the  claim  made  by  the  German  emper- 
ors to  an  inheritance  of  rights,  exercised  by  the  Greek 
emperors,  concerning  the  appointment  of  candidates  to 
ecclesiastical  offices,  and  their  investiture  with  the  right 
to  hold  church  property  as  subjects  of  the  empire. 
Under  the  new  German  Empire,  from  Otho  the  Great 
to  Henry  IV.,  936-1056,  the  popes  themselves  were 
confirmed  in  their  seats  by  the  Emperor.  Henry  III. 
obtained  from  the  Council  of  Sutry,  which  was  held 
near  Rome,  in  the  midst  of  his  own  army,  in  1046,  the 
power  of  nominating  the  popes,  without  intervention  of 
clergy  or  people.  The  influence  of  Hildebrand  was  now 
felt — an  influence  which  he  had  begun  to  exert  from  the 
time  of  Leo  IX.,  in  1048,  and  which  secured  from. 

16 


226 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


Nicolas  II.  (1063)  a  decree  transferring  the  election  of 
popes  to  a  conclave  of  cardinals.  Hildebrand,  as 
Gregory  VII.,  maintained  a  celebrated  contest  with 
Henry  IV.,  to  whom,  in  1075,  he  forbade  all  power  of 
investiture,  excommunicating  the  Emperor  the  next 
year,  and  causing  him  to  do  penance  at  Canossa.  With 
his  victorious  campaign  in  Italy  (1080-83)  Henry  drove 
the  Pope  into  exile  at  Salerno,  where  he  soon  after  died. 

His  immediate  successors,  however,  were  such  as  he 
had  designated  for  the  post,  and  were  the  inheritors  of 
his  doctrines  and  plans  for  the  supremacy  of  the  Church. 
Urban  II.  sent  forth  an  encyclical,  declaring  his  adhe- 
sion to  the  principles  of  Gregory — the  Dictatus  Gregorii ; 
and  Pascal  II.  (1099-1118),  who  had  been  one  of  Greg- 
ory's cardinals,  showed  more  zeal  than  firmness  in  the 
same  course.  In  the  Lateran  Council  under  the  Pope 
(1105),  an  oath  of  obedience  to  the  Pope  was  taken  by 
the  clergy,  and  a  promise  rendered  to  affirm  whatever 
he  and  the  Church  in  council  should  affirm.  The  Count 
De  Meulan  and  his  confederates  were  excommunicated 
for  having  encouraged  the  King  of  England  in  his  con- 
duct concerning  investitutes.  Henry  V.,  who,  in  the 
rebellion  against  his  father,  was  encouraged  by  Pascal, 
would  nevertheless  yield  nothing  on  becoming  emperor 
(1105)  in  the  matter  of  investitures;  his  example  being 
followed  in  this  respect  by  France  and  England.  Henry 
marched  into  Italy  and  imprisoned  the  Pope  in  the  year 
nil,  forcing  from  him  the  concession  of  rendering  back 
to  the  Emperor  the  fiefs  of  the  bishops,  on  condition 
that  there  should  be  no  imperial  interference  with  the 
elections.  For  his  weakness  in  this  and  in  other  points, 
the  Pope  was  bitterly  reproached,  and  the  council  of 
1 112  revoked  all  these  concessions  and  excommunicated 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


the  Emperor.  Notwithstanding  the  rebellion  of  his 
German  subjects,  Henry  collected  an  army  and  invaded 
Italy  anew  in  1116.  The  council  convoked  the  same 
year,  thereupon  renewed  the  revocation  of  the  conces- 
sions which  Pascal  had  formerly  made,  and  anathema- 
tized the  Emperor.  At  last,  the  German  people,  weary 
of  the  conflict  between  Church  and  State,  brought  a 
peaceful  compromise  in  the  concordat  at  the  imperial 
Diet  of  Worms,  in  1122.  The  principles  of  this  con- 
cordat were  adopted  by  the  council  of  1123.  The  terms 
of  the  compact  are  as  follows : 

"The  Emperor  surrenders  to  God,  to  St.  Peter  and 
Paul,  and  to  the  Catholic  Church,  all  right  of  investiture 
by  king  and  staff  He  grants  that  elections  and  ordi- 
nances in  all  churches  shall  take  place  freely  in  accord- 
ance with  ecclesiastical  laws.  The  Pope  agrees  that  the 
election  of  German  prelates  shall  be  had  in  the  presence 
of  the  Elmperor,  provided  it  is  without  violence  or 
simony.  In  case  any  election  is  disputed,  the  Emperor 
shall  render  assistance  to  the  legal  party,  with  the  advice 
of  the  archbishop  and  the  bishops.  The  person  elected 
is  invested  with  the  imperial  fief  by  the  royal  scepter 
pledged  for  the  execution  of  everything  required  by 
law.  Whoever  is  consecrated  shall  also  receive  in  like 
manner  his  investiture  from  other  parts  of  the  empire 
with  six  months."  (Hase,  Church  History,  p.  200; 
Gieseler,  Eccles.  Hist.,  iii.,  181  sq.)  The  Pope  here 
made  considerable  concessions  in  form,  but  actually, 
through  his  influence,  obtained  all  power  at  the  elections. 
The  council  of  11 23  also  renewed  the  grant  of  indul- 
gences promulgated  by  Urban  II.  in  promotion  of  the 
first  crusade  in  1095,  and  decreed  the  celibacy  of  the 
clergy.    Twenty-two  canons  of  discipline  were  enacted. 


228 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


III.  The  council  of  1139,  under  Innocent  II.,  con- 
demned the  anti-pope  Anacletus  II.,  with  his  adherents, 
and  deposed  all  who  had  received  office  under  him.  On 
the  same  day  with  the  installation  of  Innocent  II.,  in 
1 1 30,  Peter  of  Leon,  a  cardinal,  and  grandson  of  a  rich 
Jewish  banker,  had  been  proclaimed  Pope,  as  Anacletus 
II.,  by  a  majority  of  the  cardinals.  Innocent  took 
refuge  in  France,  where  he  was  supported  by  the  king. 
His  cause  was  very  warmly  espoused  by  Bernard  of 
Clairvaux,  through  whose  influence  chiefly  Innocent 
recovered  his  position  in  Italy,  and  marched  into  Rome 
triumphantly  with  Lothaire  II.,  in  1 1 36.  Anacletus 
died  in  1138,  and  a  successor  was  chosen  by  his  party 
only  with  the  purpose  of  making  peace.  Roger  of 
Sicily  had  supported  Anacletus,  and  was  on  this 
account  condemned  in  the  council  of  11 39,  though  the 
origin  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Two  Sicilies  belongs  to 
the  same  year,  Roger  having  taken  Innocent  prisoner, 
and  having  compelled  the  Pope  to  bestow  upon  him  the 
investiture  of  this  kingdom.  At  this  council  Arnold  of 
Brescia  was  also  condemned.  This  was  a  young  clergy- 
man of  the  city  of  Brescia,  a  disciple  of  Abelard.  who, 
inspired  by  the  free  philosophical  spirit  of  his  master, 
devoted  himself  to  the  promotion  of  practical  reform  in 
Church  and  State.  A  marked  spirit  of  political  inde- 
pendence was  manifesting  itself  about  this  time  in 
Lombardy,  as  an  inheritance  from  the  old  Roman  munic- 
ipalities established  there.  The  popes,  from  the  days 
of  Leo  IX.,  had  themselves  inspired  movements  of 
ecclesiastical  reform.  Pascal  II.  had  admitted  that  the 
secular  power  of  the  bishops  interfered  with  their  spirit- 
ual duties.  Bernard,  though  a  zealous  opponent  of 
Arnold,  yet  writes  as  follows  in  his  Contemplations  on  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


229 


Papacy:  "Who  can  mention  the  place  where  one  of  the 
-apostles  ever  held  a  trial,  decided  disputes  about 
boundaries  or  portioned  out  lands?"  "  I  read  that  the 
apostles  stood  before  judgment-seats,  not  sat  on  them." 

Arnold  preached  with  great  zeal  against  the  political 
-power  and  wealth  of  the  clergy.  "The  Church  ought 
nither  to  rejoice, "  he  said,  "in  an  apostolic  poverty  " 
He  was  driven  successively  from  Italy,  France  and 
Switzerland,  but  in  1139  was  recalled  tc  Rome  by  the 
populace,  who  sought  to  revive  the  sovereignty,  the 
State,  established  a  Senate,  limited  the  Pope  to  the 
exercise  of  spiritual  power,  and  the  possession  of  volun- 
tary offerings,  and  invited  the  German  emperor  to  make 
Rome  his  capital.  Arnold  and  his  "politicians"  at 
Rome  thus  gave  Pope  Innocent  and  his  immediate  suc- 
cessors— Lucius  II.,  Eugenius  III.,  and  Adrian  IV. — 
more  trouble  than  any  political  movements  elsewhere. 
This  condemnation  at  the  council  did  not  effectually 
diminish  his  power.  When,  however,  Adrian,  in  11 54, 
put  the  city  of  Rome  under  ban,  and  prohibited  all 
public  worship,  Arnold  was  abandoned  by  the  Senate, 
sacrificed  by  Frederick  I.,  and  hung  at  Rome  in  1 155, 
his  body  being  burned  and  thrown  into  the  river  Tiber. 
Among  the  canons  of  the  council,  the  twenty-third  con- 
demns the  heresy  of  the  Manichc-eans,  as  the  followers 
of  Peter  de  Brins  were  called.  This  heresy  was  attrib- 
uted to  the  early  Waldensians  in  France  and  elsewhere, 
arising  partly  from  their  ascetic  mode  of  life.  About 
one  thousand  prelates  were  present  at  this  council ; 
thirty  canons  of  discipline  were  published,  and  among 
them  reaffirmations  of  former  canons  against  simony 
and  concubinage  in  the  clergy. 

IV.  The  council  of  1179,  under  Alexander  III.,  num- 


230  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

bering  two  hundred  and  eighty,  mostly  Latin  bishops, 
was  called  to  correct  certain  abuses  which  had  arisen 
during  the  long  schism  just  brought  to  a  close  by  the 
Peace  of  Venice,  1177.  Until  near  the  end  of  the 
twelfth  century  the  popes  were  hard  pressed  by  Hohen- 
stauffen  emperors.  It  was  the  contest  of  Ghibelline  and 
Guelph.  Frederick  I.  had  taken  umbrage  at  the  use  of 
the  term  "  beneficium,"  in  a  letter  addressed  to  him  by 
Adrian  IV.,  about  the  rudeness  of  German  knights  to 
pilgrims  visiting  Rome,  as  if  the  Pope  meant  to  imply 
that  the  imperial  authority  had  been  conferred  by  him. 
The  Emperor  marched  into  Italy,  and  other  letters  were 
interchanged  between  him  and  the  Pope,  when,  upon 
the  death  of  Adrian,  in  1159,  the  two  parties — the 
hierarchic  and  the  moderate  among  the  cardinals — 
chose  two  opposing  popes,  vis.:  Alexander  III.  and 
Victor  IV.  The  Emperor's  Council,  called  at  Pavia  in 
1 160,  recognized  the  latter.  Pascal  III.  and  CaUxtus  III. 
followed  at  the  imperial  dictation,  with  but  little  influ- 
ence. Alexander,  from  his  refuge  in  France,  enjoyed 
great  popularity.  He  had  on  his  side  the  Lombard 
League.  The  cause  of  Frederick  was  defended  by  the 
lawyers  of  Bologna,  who  ascribed  to  him  unlimited 
power,  to  the  prejudice  of  the  people.  Defeated  at 
Legnano.  in  11 76,  the  Emperor  subscribed,  at  the  dicta- 
tion of  Alexander,  the  Peace  of  Venice,  the  provisions 
of  which  were  based  on  the  Concordat  of  Worms.  The 
first  and  most  important  of  the  twenty-seven  canons 
established  by  this  council,  which  were  mostly  disciplin- 
ary, provides  that  henceforth  ' '  the  election  of  the 
popes  shall  be  confined  to  the  college  of  cardinals,  and 
hvo-thirds  of  the  votes  shall  be  required  to  make  a  law- 
ful election,  instead  of  a  majority  only,  as  heretofore."" 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


231 


It  was  by  this  council  also  that  the  "errors  and  impie- 
ties" of  the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses  were  declared 
heretical.  At  the  unimportant  council  of  1167  Pope 
Alexander  excommunicated  Frederick  I. 

V.  The  council  of  12 15,  under  Innocent  III.,  was  the 
most  important  of  all  the  Lateran  Councils.  It  is  usually 
styled  the  Fourth  Lateran.  It  continued  in  session  from 
November  1 1  to  November  30,  there  being  present 
seventy-one  archbishops,  four  hundred  and  twelve 
bishops,  eight  hundred  abbots,  the  patriarchs  of  Con- 
stantinople and  Jerusalem,  and  the  legates  of  other 
patriarchs  and  crowned  heads.  The  Pope  opened  the 
convocation  with  a  sermon  on  Luke  xxii.  15,  relating  to 
the  recovery  of  the  Holy  Land  and  the  reformation  of 
the  Church.  The  remarkable  power  of  Innocent  III.  i? 
displayed  in  his  influence  over  this  council,  which  was 
submissive  to  all  his  wishes,  and  received  the  seventy 
canons  proposed  by  him.  The  papal  prerogatives 
attained  their  greatest  supremacy  in  Innocent,  whose 
pontificate  extended  from  1198  to  1216.  The  bull,  Unam 
Sanctum,  of  Boniface  VIII.,  directed  against  Philip  the 
Fair  in  1 302,  marks  the  limit  from  which  the  power  of 
the  popes  evidently  began  to  decline.  Innocent  III.,  a 
man  of  great  personal  influence,  of  marked  ability  as  a 
writer  and  orator,  bold,  crafty,  and  ever  watchful  of  the 
affairs  of  Church  and  State,  had  his  eye  on  all  that 
transpired  through  his  legates.  The  chief  objects  which 
his  pontificate  sought  were  first,  "the  strengthening  of 
the  States  of  the  Church ;  second,  separation  of  the  two 
Sicilies  from  all  dependence  on  the  German  Empire; 
third,  the  liberation  of  Italy  from  all  foreign  control ; 
fourth,  the  exercise  of  guardianship  over  the  confeder- 
acy of  its  States;  fifth,  the  liberation  of  the  Oriental 


232 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


Church ;  sixth,  the  extermination  of  heretics,  and,  sev- 
enth, the  exercise  of  ecclesiastical  discipline."  (Hase, 
Church  Hist.,  p.  207.) 

Hitherto  England,  Germany  and  France  had  consti- 
tuted a  balance  of  power  against  the  Pope,  but  under 
Innocent  the  two  former,  as  well  as  Italy,  submitted  to 
the  claims  of  the  pseudo-Isodorean  decretals.  France 
was  early  laid  under  interdict  (1200),  on  account  of 
Philip  Augustus'  repudiation  of  Ingeburge  and  the  French 
bishop's  approval  of  the  act,  while  John  of  England  was 
deprived  of  his  realm,  to  receive  it  back  (in  12 13)  only 
as  a  fief  of  Rome.  Deciding  at  first  for  Otto  IV.,  the 
Guelph,  against  the  Hohenstauffen  Philip,  in  Germany, 
Innocent  subsequently  secured  from  the  council  the 
recognition  of  Frederick  II.,  vainly  seeking  in  this  his 
German  policy  to  free  Italy  entirely  from  the  power  of 
the  Emperor.  The  famous  Seventy  Constitutions  of 
Innocent,  if  not  discussed  in  a  conciliatory  manner  by 
the  bishops,  or  passed  with  every  form  of  enactment, 
were  nevertheless  regarded  as  the  canons  of  the  council, 
so  recognized  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  by  church 
authorities  of  the  intervening  age,  and  they  have  consti- 
tuted a  fundamental  law  for  many  well-known  practices 
of  the  Church.  The  first  of  these  canons  asserts  the 
Catholic  faith  in  the  unity  of  God  against  the  Manichaean 
sects.  It  also,  for  the  first  time,  makes  the  doctrine  of 
substantiation,  in  the  use  of  this  express  term,  an  article 
of  faith.  "The  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the 
sacrament  of  the  altar  are  truly  contained  under  the 
species  of  bread  and  wine,  the  bread  being,  by  the 
divine  omnipotence,  transubstantiated  into  his  body,  and 
the  wine  into  his  blood."  The  second  canon  condemns 
the  treatise  of  Joachim,  the  prophet  of  Calabria,  which 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


lie  wrote  against  Peter  Lombard  on  the  subject  of  the 
Trinity. 

The  third  canon  is  of  great  importance,  furnishing  the 
basis  for  the  crusade  against  the  Albigenses,  and  for  all 
severities  of  a  like  character  on  the  part  of  the  Romish 
Church.  It  "  anathematizes  all  heretics  who  hold  any- 
thing in  opposition  to  the  preceding  exposition  of  faith, 
and  enjoins  that,  after  condemnation,  they  shall  be 
delivered  over  to  the  secular  arm;  also  excommunicates 
all  who  receive,  protect  or  maintain  heretics,  and  threat- 
ens with  deposition  all  bishops  who  do  not  use  their 
utmost  endeavors  to  clear  their  diocese  of  them." 
(Landon,  Manual  of  Councils,  p.  295.) 

The  fourth  canon  invites  the  Greeks  to  unite  with  and 
submit  themselves  to  the  Romish  Church.  The  fifth 
canon  regulates  the  order  of  precedence  of  the  patriarchs: 
I.  Rome;  2.  Constantinople;  3.  Alexandria;  4.  Antioch; 
5.  Jerusalem;  and  permits  these  several  patriarchs  to 
give  the  pall  to  the  archbishops  of  their  dependencies, 
exacting  from  themselves  a  profession  of  faith  and  of 
obedience  to  the  Roman  See,  when  they  receive  the  pall 
from  the  Pope.  The  sixth  to  the  twentieth,  inclusive,  are 
of  minor  importance  to  the  Christian  world.  (Landon, 
p.  296.)  The  twenty  first  zz.x\ox\  enjoins  "all  the  faithful 
of  both  sexes,  having  arrived  at  years  of  discretion,  to 
confess  all  their  sins  at  least  once  a  year  to  their  proper 
priest,  and  to  communicate  at  Easter."  This  is  the  first 
canon  known  which  orders  sacramental  confession  gen- 
erally, and  may  have  been  occasioned  by  the  teaching 
of  the  Waldenses,  that  neither  confession  nor  satisfac- 
tion was  necessary  in  order  to  obtain  remission  of  sin. 
From  the  words  with  which  it  begins  it  is  known  as  the 
canon  "Omnis   utriusque   sex  As,"   and  was  solemnly 


234 


HISTORY  OF  CHUKCH  COUNCILS. 


reaffirmed  by  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  canons  (^iven 
completely  by  Landon,  Manual  of  Councils,  p.  293,  sq.) 
in  general  constitute  a  body  of  full  and  severe  disciplin- 
ary enactments.  This  council  reaffirmed  and  extended 
the  "Truce  of  God"  on  plenary  indulgence  which  had 
been  previously  proclaimed  in  behalf  of  the  Eastern 
crusades,  and  fixed  the  time,  June  i,  and  the  place 
Sicily,  as  a  rendezvous  for  another  crusade. 

This  council  confirmed  Simon  de  Montfort  in  posses- 
sion of  lands  which  the  crusaders  had  obtained  by  papal 
confiscation  from  the  Waldenses,  and  decreed  the  entire 
extirpation  of  the  heresy.  The  Waldenses  or  Albigenses 
in  the  south  of  France  were  the  followers  of  Peter  Waldo, 
a  wealthy  citizen  of  Lyons,  who,  from  religious  princi- 
ple, adopted  a  life  of  poverty.  His  adherents  were  also 
called  Leonistae  and  "  poor  men  of  Lyons.  "  They  were 
allied  in  their  sentiments  to  the  Vaudois  of  the  Pied- 
montese  valleys,  with  whom  they  became  united  fo( 
mutual  defense.  They  prote.sted  against  these  points  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  Romish  Church  :  First,  transubstan- 
tiation ;  second,  the  sacraments  of  confirmation,  confes- 
sion and  marriage;  third,  the  invocation  of  saints;  fourth, 
the  worship  of  images;  fifth,  the  temporal  power  of  tht 
clergy.  A  crusade  had  been  instituted  against  them  by 
the  papal  jaower  in  1178.  Innocent  sought  to  win  then^ 
over  and  make  monks  of  them  by  establishing,  in  1201, 
the  order  of  ' '  Poor  Catholics. "  Unsuccessful  in  this,  he 
confiscated  their  lands  to  the  feudal  lords,  and  estab- 
lished an  inquisition  among  them  under  the  direction  of 
Dominic,  which  was  formally  sanctioned  by  the  council 
under  consideration.  The  warfare  against  them,  incited 
and  directed  by  the  monks  of  Citeaux,  was  allowed 
by  Philip  Augustus.     Count  Raymond,  of  Toulouse,. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


e5ipoused  the  cause  of  his  persecuted  vassals.  The  papal 
legate,  Peter  of  Castelman,  sent  to  convert  the  Walden- 
ses,  was  murdered  by  Raymond,  whose  dominions  were 
thereupon  assaulted,  in  1209,  by  a  fiercer  crusade  of 
so-called  '-Christian  Pilgrims,"  led  on  by  Simon  de 
Montfort  and  Arnold,  the  Abbot  of  Citeaux.  The  Count 
of  Toulouse  submitted,  but  a  bloody  warfare  was  prose- 
cuted against  Raymond  Roger,  viscount  of  Beziers  and 
Albi,  and  subsequently  two  hundred  towns  and  castles, 
within  the  boundaries  of  the  two  counts,  were  granted 
to  the  successful  Simon  de  Montfort.  A  rebellion,  how- 
ever, against  his  power  deprived  him  of  all;  but  Ray- 
mond of  Toulouse,  who  appeared  at  the  council  of  121 5, 
obtained  no  favor,  and  his  territory  was  declared  to  be 
alienated  from  him  forever. 

VI.  The  Lateran  Council  of  1512-1517,  under  Julius 
II.  and  Leo  X.,  was  convened  for  the  "reformation  of 
abuses,"  for  the  condemnation  of  the  Council  of  Pisa, 
"and  attained  its  most  important  result  in  the  abolition 
of  the  Pragmatic  Sanction."  France,  under  Louis  XII., 
had  obtained  great  military  successes  in  Italy  by  the 
League  of  Cambray,  formed  in  1509  against  Venice.  In 
the  interests  of  France,  and  by  the  friendship  of  some 
of  the  cardinals,  Louis  XII.  summoned  a  Church  Coun- 
cil at  Pisa,  November,  15 11,  which  in  15 12  was  moved 
to  Milan,  but  was  entirely  fruitless  of  results,  being 
dissolved  by  the  presence  of  the  Pope's  army.  Julius  I., 
though  at  first  jealous  of  Venice,  had  nevertheless, 
aroused  by  the  successes  of  the  French  general,  formed 
the  Holy  Alliance  with  Venice,  Spain,  England  and 
Switzerland,  and  now,  at  the  head  of  his  army,  drove 
the  French  beyond  the  Alps  and  himself  summoned  a 
council  at  the  Lateran,  May  10,  15 12.    This  council 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


extended  over  twelve  sessions,  until  March,  15 17.  The 
Bishop  of  Guerk  had  actively  promoted  the  summoning 
of  the  council,  and  attended  as  representative  of  the 
German  Emperor.  All  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Pisa 
were  at  once  annulled.  Julius  having  died  in  February, 
1513,  Leo  X.  presided  over  the  sixth  session. 

At  the  eighth  session,  in  December,  15 13,  Louis 
XIL,  through  his  ambassador,  declared  his  adhesion  to 
this  Council  of  the  Lateran.  At  the  eleventh  session, 
in  December,  15 16,  the  bull  was  read  which,  in  place  of 
the  Pragmatic  Sanction  of  Bourges  (1438),  wherein 
France  accepted  the  decisions  of  the  Basle  Council,  in  so 
far  as  they  were  consistent  with  the  liberties  of  the 
G.illican  Church,  substituted  the  concordat  agreed  upon 
this  year  (15 16)  between  Leo  X.  and  Francis  I.  Through 
hope  of  increasing  his  power  in  Italy,  Francis  largely  sac- 
rificed the  liberties  of  the  Church.  Several  of  the  articles 
of  the  Pragmatic  were  retained,  but  most  of  them  were 
altered  or  abolished.  The  first  article  was  entirely  con- 
trary to  the  Pragmatic,  which  had  re  established  the 
right  of  election,  while  the  concordat  declares  that  the 
chapters  of  the  cathedrals  in  France  shall  no  longer  pro- 
ceed to  elect  the  bishop  in  case  of  vacancy,  but  that  the 
king  shall  name  a  proper  person,  whom  the  Pope  shall 
nominate  to  the  vacant  see.  The  concordat,  on  account 
especially  of  this  provision,  met  with  great  opposition 
in  the  parliament,  universities  and  the  church  at  Paris. 
It  was  a  great  advance  of  the  Papacy  against  the  liber- 
ties of  France.  (Janus,  Pope  and  Council,  xxviii.  and 
xxix  ) 

Neither  this  council,  nor  the  other  four,  viz.:  those  of 
I123,  1139,  1179  and  1215,  styled  ecumenical  by  the 
JRomish  Church,  can  be  properly  regarded  as  such- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Some  writers  mention  as  the  sixth  Lateran  the  council 
convened  by  Pope  Benedict  XIII.  on  the  bull  Unigemius, 
and  for  the  purpose  of  general  reform  in  the  Church. 

THE  COUNCIL  OF  LYONS. 

Lyons  is  a  city  of  France,  and  is  situated  three  hun- 
dred and  sixteen  miles  southeast  of  Paris,  and  is  noted 
in  ecclesiastical  history  as  the  seat  of  two  ecumenical 
councils,  the  first  of  which  was  held  in  1245,  consisting 
of  one  hundred  and  forty  bishops,  and  convened  for  the 
purpose  of  promoting  the  crusades,  restoring  ecclesi- 
astical discipline,  and  dethroning  Frederick  II.,  Emperor 
of  Germany.  It  was  also  decreed  at  this  council  that 
cardinals  should  wear  red  hats. 

At  the  second  council,  held  in  1274,  there  were  five 
hundred  bishops  present  and  about  one  thousand 
"inferior  clergy."  Its  principal  object  was  the  reunion 
of  the  Greek  and  Latin  Churches.  The  first  of  these 
councils  was  held  under  the  pontificate  of  Innocent  IV., 
and  the  second  under  the  pontificate  of  Gregory  X. 

COUNCILS  OF  VIENNE. 

Vienne  is  a  city  of  Dauphine,  France,  where  numerous 
church  councils  were  held. 

I.  The  first  of  which  mention  is  made  was  held  in 
474;  of  its  transactions  nothing  is  known  beyond  the 
fact  that  it  sanctioned  the  solemn  observance  of  the 
three  days  preceding  Ascension  Day,  which  Bishop 
Mamercus,  of  Vienne,  had  ordered. 

II.  The  one  held  in  870  simply  confirmed  the  privi- 
leges bestowed  upon  a  monastery. 

III.  Held  in  892,  by  order  of  Pope  Formosus,  whose 
two  legates,  Pascal  and  John,  presided.  Several  bishops 
were  present,  and  the  following  canons  were  published: 


238 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUN'CILS. 


I,  2,  Excommunicate  those  who  seize  the  property 
of  the  Church,  or  maltreat  clerks. 

4  Forbids  laymen  to  present  to  churches  without  the 
consent  of  the  bishop  of  the  diocese ;  also  forbids  them 
to  take  any  present  from  those  whom  they  present. — • 
Mansi,  Concil.  ix.,  433. 

IV.  Held  in  907 ;  was  concocted  by  Archbishop 
Alexander,  of  Vienne,  and  adjusted  a  dispute  between 
Abbots  Aribert  and  Barnard  respecting  the  income 
receipts  of  monasteries. 

V.  Held  in  11 12  by  Archbishop  Guido;  excommuni- 
cated Emperor  Henry  V.,  because  he  claimed  the  right 
of  episcopal  investiture,  and  revoked  the  treaty  of  1 1 1 1, 
which  conferred  such  right  upon  the  crown. 

VI.  Held  in  11 19;  was  called  by  Pope  Gelasius  H., 
who  had  again  excommunicated  Henry  V. ,  on  the  occa- 
sion of  his  setting  up  an  anti-pope  in  the  person  of 
Gregory  VHl.;  but  nothing  whatever  concerning  the 
transactions  of  this  synod  is  known. 

Vn.  Held  in  11 24;  was  incited  by  Pope  Calixtus  II., 
and  called  by  Archbishop  Peter,  of  Vienne ;  legislated 
with  reference  to  the  securing  of  ecclesiastical  privileges 
and  possessions. 

VIII.  Held  in  1 142  ;  was  chiefly  concerned  with  the 
election  of  a  new  bishop. 

IX.  Held  in  1164,  at  which  Archbishop  Reginald,  of 
Cologne,  vainly  endeavored  to  secure  a  recognition  of 
Paschal  III.,  whom  the  Emperor  Frederick  had  endorsed. 

X.  Held  in  1199,  by  the  Cardinal-legate  Peter  of 
Capua,  for  the  purpose  of  promulgating  the  decree  of 
Pope  Innocent  III.,  which  punished  the  king,  Philip 
Augustus,  with  excommunication  on  account  of  his 
renunciation  of  Inneburgis,  his  lawful  consort,  and  his 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


subsequent  marriage  with  Agnes  of  Meran. — Mansi, 
Concii.  xi. ,  II. 

XI.  Held  in  1289;  is  barely  mentioned  in  the  records, 
and  some  authorities  deny  that  it  was  held. 

XII.  Held  in  131 1;  known  as  the  fifteenth  ecumeni- 
cal council,  and  the  only  one  of  the  series  to  which 

""attaches  any  considerable  importance.  It  was  origin- 
ally ordered,  by  a  papal  bull  of  1308,  to  meet  October 
I,  1310,  but  was  subsequently  postponed  for  one  year. 
The  council  finally  convened  under  the  presidency  of 
Pope  Clement  v.,  October  16,  131 1.  The  number  of 
prelates  present  is  fixed  by  some  at  one  hundred  and 
fourteen,  and  by  others  at  three  hundred,  including  the 
patriarchs  of  the  Latin  Rite  of  Alexandria  and  Antioch. 
It  discussed  methods  for  preserving  the  purity  of  the 
faith,  which  was  impaired  by  the  heretical  influence  of 
John  of  Olivia,  and  of  the  Fratricelli,  Dolcinists,  Beg- 
hards  and  Beguins;  also  the  aid  to  be  afforded  the  Holy 
Land;  the  reform  of  ecclesiastical  discipline;  and  espe- 
cially the  disposition  to  be  made  of  the  Order  of  Knights 
Templar.  The  decision  abrogated  the  Order  of  Tem- 
plars ;  declared  the  legitimacy  of  the  late  Pope  Boniface 
VIII.,  and  his  freedom  from  the  crimes  charged  against 
him ;  conceded  titles  for  six  years  to  the  kings  of  France, 
England  and  Navarre,  in  order  that  they  might  organize 
a  crusade  ;  and  regulated  the  government  of  the  begging 
friars  and  similar  matters.  Most  of  the  decrees  which 
have  to  do  with  matters  of  doctrine  and  discipline  are 
contained  in  the  so  called  Clementines,  and  were  first 
promulgated  by  Pope  John  XXII. — Landon,  Manual  of 
Councils,  5  V. 

XIII.  Held  in  1557;  it  determined  several  questions 
of  church  discipline  ;  discussed  the  use  of  sermons  as  a 


240  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

means  of  instructing  the  people ;  forbade  the  admission 
of  strangers  to  the  pulpits;  demanded  the  rendition  of 
heretics ;  and  prohibited  merry-makings  on  feast-days 
and  association  with  suspected  persons  ;  gave  directions 
concerning  the  tonsure  and  garb  of  priests ;  denied  to 
monks  and  nuns  the  privilege  of  leaving  their  convents, 
etc.  (Martine,  Thesaur.  Novus  Anecdot. — Lutet  Par. 
1717,  iv.,  446  sq.) 

COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE. 

This  council  was  summoned  at  the  dictation  of  Pope 
John  XXIII.,  in  accordance  with  the  writ  of  the 
Emperor  Sigismund,  and  continued  its  sessions  from 
1414  to  1418.  One  of  its  professed  objects  was  to  put 
an  end  to  the  schism  which  had  lasted  for  thirty  years, 
and  which  was  caused  by  the  several  claimants  for  the 
pontificate.  At  this  time,  besides  John  (Balthasar 
Cossa),  two  others  claimed  the  title  of  Pope,  viz.:  Pedro 
of  Luna,  a  native  of  Catalonia,  who  styled  himself  Bene- 
dict XIII.,  and  Angelo  Corrario,  a  Venetian,  wha 
assumed  the  name  of  Gregory  XII.  Another  object  of 
the  council  was  to  take  cognizance  of  the  so-called  her- 
esies of  Huss  and  Wickliffe.  The  council  was  called  to 
meet  at  Constance  on  the  festival  of  All-Saints,  in  1414, 
and  so  great  was  the  influx  of  people,  that  it  was  esti- 
mated that  not  less  than  thirty  thousand  horses  were 
brought  to  Constance,  which  may  give  some  idea  of  the 
immense  multitude  of  human  beings.  It  is  stated  that 
during  the  session,  the  Emperor,  the  Pope,  twenty 
princes,  one  hundred  and  forty  counts,  more  than  twenty 
cardinals,  seven  patriarchs,  twenty  archbishops,  ninety- 
one  bishops,  six  hundred  other  clerical  dignitaries,  and 
about  four  thousand  priests,  were  present  at  this  cele- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


241 


brated  convocation.  The  pretended  heresies  of  Wick- 
hfie  and  Huss  were  here  condemned,  and  the  latter, 
notwithstanding  the  assurances  of  safety  given  him  by 
the  Emperor,  was  burnt  at  the  stake  July  6,  141 5,  and 
his  friend  and  companion,  Jerome  of  Prague,  met  with 
the  same  fate,  May  30,  1416.  The  three  popes  were 
formally  deposed,  and  Martin  V.  was  legally  chosen  to 
the  chair  of  St.  Peter;  but  instead  of  furthering  the 
Emperor's  wishes  for  a  reformation  in  the  affairs  of  the 
Church,  he  thwarted  his  plans,  and  nothing  was  accom- 
plished till  the  council  of  Basle.  At  this  council  the 
question  was  very  warmly  agitated  whether  the  authority 
of  an  ecumenical  council  is  greater  than  that  of  the  Pope 
or  not?  Gerson  "proved  (so  it  is  asserted)  that  in  cer- 
tain cases  the  Church,  or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  an 
ecumenical  council,  can  assemble  without  the  command 
or  consent  of  the  Pope,  even  supposing  him  to  have 
been  canonically  elected,  and  to  live  respectably." 
These  peculiar  cases  he  states  to  be:  "  i.  If  the  Pope, 
being  accused,  and  brought  into  a  position  requiring  the 
opinion  of  the  Church,  refuses  to  convoke  a  council  for 
the  purpose.  2.  When  important  matters,  concerning 
the  government  of  the  Church,  are  in  agitation,  requir- 
ing to  be  set  at  rest  by  an  ecumenical  council,  which, 
nevertheless,  the  Pope  refuses  to  convoke."  (Herzog, 
Real  Encykl.,  iii.,  144,  and  many  other  authorities.) 

THE  COUNCIL  AT  BASLE. 

This  council  was  called  by  Pope  Martin  V.,  and  con- 
tinued by  Eugenius  IV.  It  was  opened  July  23,  143 1, 
by  Cardinal  Julian,  and  closed  May  16,  1443,  forty  five 
sessions  in  all  having  been  held,  of  which  the  first  twenty- 
five  were  acknowledged  by  the  Gallican  Church.  The 

»7 


242 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


Ultramontanes  reject  it  altogether,  but  "on  grounds 
utterly  untenable,"  it  is  said.  The  council,  in  its 
thirtieth  session,  declared  that  "a  general  council  is 
superior  to  a  pope;  "  and,  in  1437,  Eugenius  transferred 
its  sessions  to  Ferrara.  The  council  refused  to  obey, 
and  continued  its  sessions  at  Basle,  the  capital  of  a  can- 
ton of  the  same  name  in  Switzerland.  The  principal 
objects  for  which  this  council  was  called  were  the  refor- 
mation of  the  Church,  and  the  reunion  of  the  Greek 
with  the  Roman  Church.  "  ]Many  of  its  resolutions 
were  admirable  both  in  spirit  and  form ;  and  had  the 
council  been  allowed  to  continue  its  sessions,  and  had 
the  Pope  sanctioned  its  proceedings,  there  would  have 
ensued  a  great  and  salutary  change  in  the  Roman 
Church.",  But  the  power  of  the  Papacy  was  at  stake, 
and  the  reform  was  suppressed.  Its  most  important 
acts  were  as  follows  : 

In  the  first  session,  December  7,  1431,  the  decree  of  the  council  of 
Constance,  concerning  the  celebration  of  a  general  council  after  five 
and  after  seven  years,  was  read,  together  with  the  bull  of  Martin  V. 
convoking  the  council,  in  which  he  named  Julian,  president ;  also  the 
letter  of  Eugene  IV.  to  the  latter  upon  the  subject :  afterward  the  six 
objects  proposed  in  calling  the  council  were  enumerated  :  1.  The 
extir])ation  of  heresy.  2.  The  reunion  of  all  Christian  persons  with 
the  Catholic  Church.  3.  To  afford  instruction  in  the  true  faith.  4. 
To  appease  the  wars  between  Christian  princes.  5.  To  reform  the 
Church  in  its  head  and  in  its  members.  6.  To  re-establish,  as  far  as 
possible,  the  ancient  discipline  of  the  Church. 

It  soon  Eippeared  that  Pope  Eugene  was  determined 
to  break  u^  the  council,  which  took  vigorous  measures 
of  defense.  In  the  second  session  (Feb.  15,  1432)  it  was 
"declared  that  the  synod,  being  assembled  in  the  name 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  representing  the  Church  mili- 
tant, derives  its  power  directly  from  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  that  all  persons,  of  whatever  rank  or  dignity, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


243 


not  excepting  the  Roman  Pontiff  himself,  are  bound  to 
obey  it ;  and  that  any  person,  of  whatever  rank  or  con- 
dition, not  excepting  the  Pope,  who  shall  refuse  to  obey 
the  laws  and  decrees  of  this  or  any  other  general  council, 
shall  be  put  to  penance  and  punished. " 

In  the  third  session  (April  29,  1432)  Pope  Eugene  was 
summoned  to  appear  before  the  council  within  three 
months.  In  August  the  Pope  sent  legates  to  vindicate 
his  authority  over  the  council;  and  in  the  eighth  session 
(December  18)  it  was  agreed  that  the  Pope  should  be 
proceeded  against  canonically,  in  order  to  declare  him 
contumacious,  and  to  visit  him  with  the  canonical 
penalty ;  two  months'  delay,  however,  being  granted 
him  within  which  to  revoke  his  bull  for  the  dissolution 
of  the  council. 

On  the  i6th  of  January,  1433,  deputies  arrived  from 
the  Bohemians,  demanding  (i)  liberty  to  administer  the 
Eucharist  in  both  kinds  ;  (2)  that  all  mortal  sin,  and 
especially  open  sin,  should  be  repressed,  corrected  and 
punished  according  to  God's  law;  (3)  that  the  Word  of 
God  should  be  preached  faithfully  by  the  bishops,  and 
by  such  deacons  as  were  fit  for  it ;  (4)  that  the  clergy 
should  not  possess  authority  in  temporal  matters.  It 
was  afterward  agreed  that  the  clergy  in  Bohemia  and 
Moravia  should  be  allowed  to  give  the  cup  to  the  laity ; 
but  no  reconciliation  was  effected.  In  April,  1433, 
Eugene  signified  his  willingness  to  send  legates  to  the 
council  to  preside  in  his  name,  but  the  council  refused 
his  conditions.  In  the  twelfth  session  (July  14,  1433,) 
the  Pope,  by  a  decree,  was  required  to  renounce  within 
sixty  days  his  design  of  transferring  the  council  from 
Basle,  upon  pain  of  being  pronounced  contumacious. 
In  return,  Eugene,  irritated  by  these  proceedings,  issued 


244 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


a  bull,  annulling  all  the  decrees  of  the  council  against 
himself.  Later  in  autumn,  the  Pope,  in  fear  of  the 
council,  supported  as  it  was  by  the  Emperor  and  by- 
France,  agreed  to  an  accommodation.  He  chose  four 
cardinals  to  preside  with  Julian  at  the  council;  he  revoked 
all  the  bulls  which  he  had  issued  for  its  dissolution,  and 
published  one  according  to  the  form  sent  him  hy  the 
council.  [Session  XIV.]  It  was  to  the  effect  that, 
although  he  had  broken  up  the  council  at  Basle  lawfully 
assembled,  nevertheless,  in  order  to  appease  the  disorders 
which  had  arisen,  he  declared  the  council  to  have  been 
lawfully  continued  from  its  commencement,  and  that  it 
would  be  so  to  the  end  ;  that  he  approved  of  all  that  it 
had  offered  and  decided,  and  that  he  declared  the  bull 
for  its  dissolution,  which  he  had  issued,  to  be  null  and 
void;  thus,  as  Bossuet  observes,  setting  the  council 
above  himself,  since,  in  obedience  to  its  order,  he 
revoked  his  own  decree,  made  with  all  the  authority  of 
his  pontifical  see.  In  spite  of  this  forced  yielding, 
Eugene  never  ceased  plotting  for  the  dissolution  of  the 
council.  In  subsequent  sessions  earnest  steps  were 
taken  toward  reform ;  the  annates  and  taxes  (the  Pope's 
chief  revenues)  were  abrogated ;  the  papal  authority 
over  chapter  elections  was  restricted :  citations  to  Rome 
on  minor  grounds  were  forbidden,  etc.  These  move- 
ments increased  the  hatred  of  the  papal  party,  to  which, 
at  last.  Cardinal  Julian  was  won  over.  The  proposed 
reunion  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  Churches  made  it 
necessary  to  appoint  a  place  of  conference  with  the 
Greeks.  The  council  proposed  Basle  or  Avignon;  the 
papal  party  demanded  an  Italian  city.  The  latter,  in 
the  minority,  left  Basle,  and  Eugene  called  an  opposi- 
tion council  to  meet  at  Ferrara  in  1437.    After  Julian's 


REFORWATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


-departure  the  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Aries  presided. 

In  the  thirty-first  session,  Jan.  24,  1438,  the  council 
•declared  the  Pope  Eugene  contumacious,  suspended  him 
from  the  exercise  of  all  jurisdiction,  temporal  or  spiritual, 
and  pronounced  all  that  he  should  do  to  be  null  and 
void.  In  the  twenty-fourth  session,  June  25,  1439,  sen- 
tence of  deposition  was  pronounced  against  Eugene, 
making  use  of  the  strongest  possible  terms.  France, 
England  and  Germany  disapproved  of  this  sentence.  On 
October  30,  Amadeus,  Duke  of  Savoy,  was  elected  Pope, 
and  took  the  name  of  Felix  V.  Alphonso,  King  of 
Aragon,  the  Queen  of  Hungary,  and  the  Dukes  of 
Bavaria  and  Austria  recognized  Felix,  as  also  did  the 
Universities  of  Germany,  Paris  and  Cracow ;  but  France, 
England  and  Scotland,  while  they  acknowledged  the 
authority  of  the  council  of  Basle,  continued  to  recognize 
Eugene  as  the  lawful  Pope.  Pope  Eugene  dying  four 
years  after,  Nicholas  V.  was  elected  in  his  stead,  and 
recognized  by  the  whole  Church,  whereupon  Felix  V. 
renounced  the  pontificate  in  1449,  and  thus  the  schism 
ended.  (Manst,  vols.  29  to  31;  Landon,  Manual  of 
Councils,  74 ;  Palmer,  On  the  Church ;  Mosheim,  Church 
History;  Ranke,  History  of  Papacy,  i.,  36,  243. 

COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 

This  council  is  regarded  by  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  as  the  last  in  the  order  of  assemblies  known  as 
ecumenical  or  general,  and  as  the  great  repository  of 
all  the  doctrinal  judgments  of  that  ecclesiastical  body 
on  the  chief  points  at  issue  with  the  Reformers  of  the 
sixteenth  century.  "  Very  early  in  the  conflict  with  Leo 
X.,  Luther  had  appealed  from  the  Pope  to  a  general 
council ;  and  after  the  failure  of  the  first  attempts  at  an 


flISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


adjustment  of  the  controversies,  a  general  desire  grew 
up  in  the  Church  for  the  convocation  of  a  general  coun- 
cil, in  which  the  true  sense  of  the  Church  upon  the  con- 
troversies which  had  been  raised,  might  be  finally  and 
decretorially  settled.  Another,  and,  to  many,  a  still 
more  pressing  motive  for  desiring  a  council,  was  the 
wish  to  bring  about  a  reform  of  the  alleged  abuses  as 
well  of  the  Court  of  Rome  as  of  the  domestic  discipline 
and  government  of  local  churches,  to  which  the  move- 
ment of  the  Reformers  was  in  part  at  least  ascribed.  But 
the  measures  for  convoking  a  council  were  long  delayed, 
owing  partly,  it  has  been  alleged,  to  the  intrigues  of 
the  party  who  were  interested  in  the  maintenance  of 
those  profitable  abuses,  and  especially  of  the  officials  of 
the  Roman  court,  including  the  cardinals,  and  even  the 
popes  themselves ;  but  partly  also  the  jealousies,  and 
even  the  actual  conflicts,  which  took  place  between 
Charles  V.  and  the  King  of  France,  whose  joint  action 
was  absolutely  indispensable  to  the  success  of  any 
ecclesiastical  assembly."  (Chambers'  Encyclopedia,  vol. 
ix..  p.  533.) 

It  was  not  till  the  pontificate  of  Paul  III.  (1534-1549) 
that  the  design  assumed  a  practical  character.  One  of 
the  great  difficulties  was  that  in  regard  to  a  place  of 
meeting.  In  these  discussions  much  time  was  lost;  and 
without  entering  into  detail,  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that 
the  assembly  did  not  actually  meet  till  December  13, 
1545,  at  which  time  four  archbishops,  twenty-two 
bishops,  five  generals  of  orders,  and  the  representatives 
of  the  Emperor  and  of  the  King  of  the  Romans, 
assembled  at  Trent,  a  city  of  the  Tyrol.  The  number 
of  prelates  afterward  increased.  The  Pope  was  repre- 
sented by  three  legates,  who  presided  in  his  name,  vis.,. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


247 


Cardinals  del  Monte,  Cervino  and  Pole.  The  first  three 
sessions  were  devoted  to  preliminaries.  It  was  not  till 
the  fourth  session  (April,  1546)  that  the  really  important 
work  of  the  council  began.  It  was  decided,  after  much 
disputation,  that  the  doctrinal  questions  and  the  ques- 
tions of  reformation  should  both  be  proceeded  with 
simultaneously.  Accordingly,  the  discussions  on  both 
subjects  were  continued  through  the  fourth,  fifth,  sixth 
and  seventh  sessions,  in  all  of  which  "matters  of  great 
moment  were  decided;"  when  a  division  between  the 
Pope  and  the  Emperor,  who,  by  the  victory  of  Miililberg, 
had  become  all-powerful  in  the  Empire,  made  the 
former  desirous  to  transfer  the  council  to  some  place 
beyond  the  reach  of  Charles'  arbitrary  dictation.  The 
appearance  of  the  plague  at  Trent  furnished  a  cause  for 
removal,  and  in  the  eighth  session  a  decree  was  passed 
(March  11,  1547)  transferring  the  council  to  Bologna. 

The  change  of  place  was  opposed  by  the  bishops  who 
were  in  the  imperial  interest,  and  the  division  which 
ensued  had  the  effect  of  suspending  all  practical  action. 
In  the  meantime,  Paul  III.  died.  Julius  III.,  who  had, 
as  Cardinal  del  Monte,  presided  as  legate  in  the  council, 
took  measures  for  its  resumption  at  Trent,  where  it 
again  assembled.  May  i,  155  i.  The  sessions  9-12,  held 
partly  at  Bologna,  and  partly  at  Trent,  were  spent  in 
discussions  regarding  the  suspension  and  removal ;  but 
in  the  thirteenth  session  the  real  work  of  the  assembly 
was  renewed,  and  was  continued,  slowly,  but  with  great 
care,  till  the  sixteenth  session,  when,  on  account  of  the 
apprehended  insecurity  of  Trent,  the  passes  of  the  Tyrol 
having  fallen  into  the  hands  of  Maurice  of  Saxony,  the 
sittings  were  again  suspended  for  two  years. 

But  the  suspension  was  destined  to  continue  for  no 


248 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


less  than  nine  years.  Julius  III.  died  in  1555,  and  was 
followed  rapidly  to  the  grave  his  successor  (who  had 
also  been  his  fellow-legate  in  th  .  council  as  Cardinal 
Cervina)  Marcellus  II.  The  pontificate  of  Paul  IV. 
(1555-1559)  was  a  very  troubled  one,  as  well  on  account 
of  internal  dissensions  as  owing  to  the  abdication  of 
Charles  V.;  nor  was  it  till  the  accession  of  Pius  IV. 
(i  559-1565)  that  the  bishops  and  legates  were  again 
brought  together  to  the  number  of  one  hundred  and 
two,  under  the  presidency  of  Cardinal  Gonzaga,  reopen- 
ing their  deliberations  with  the  seventeenth  session. 
All  the  succeeding  sessions  were  ' '  devoted  to  matters 
of  the  highest  importance,"  among  which  may  be  men- 
tioned such  doctrines  and  practices  as  (i)  communion 
under  one  kind,  (2)  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  (3)  the 
sacrament  of  orders,  (4)  the  nature  and  origin  of  the 
grades  of  the  hierarchy,  (5)  marriage  and  the  many  ques- 
tions relating  to  it.  These  grave  discussions  occupied 
the  sessions  17-24,  and  lasted  till  November  11,  1563. 
Much  anxiety  was  expressed  on  the  part  of  many  bish- 
ops to  draw  the  council  to  a  conclusion,  in  order  that 
they  might  be  able  to  return  to  their  sees  in  a  time  so 
critical ;  and  accordingly,  as  the  preliminary  discussions 
regarding  most  of  the  remaining  questions  had  already 
taken  place,  decrees  were  prepared  in  special  congrega- 
tions comprising  almost  all  the  remaining  subjects  of 
controversy,  as  (i)  purgatory,  (2)  invocation  of  saints, 
(3)  images,  (4)  relics  and  (5)  indulgences.  Several 
other  matters,  rather  of  detail  than  of  doctrinal  princi- 
ple, were  referred  to  the  Pope,  to  be  by  him  examined 
and  arranged ;  and  on  the  3d  and  4th  of  December, 
1563,  these  important  decrees  were  finally  read,  approved 
and  subscribed  by  the  members  of  the  assembly,  con- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


249 


sisting  of  four  cardinal  legates,  two  other  cardinals, 
twenty-five  archbishops,  one  hundred  and  sixty-eight 
bishops,  seven  abbots,  seven  generals  of  orders  and 
thirty-nine  proxies  of  bishops,  comprising  in  all  two 
hundred  and  fifty-two. 

These  decrees  were  confirmed  January  10,  1564,  by 
Pius  IV.,  who  had  drawn  up,  based  upon  them  in  con- 
junction with  the  creeds  previously  in  use,  a  profession 
of  feith  known  under  his  name.  "The  doctrinal  decrees 
of  the  council  were  received  at  once  throughout  the 
Western  Church,  a  fact  which  it  is  necessary  to  note,  as 
the  question  as  to  the  reception  of  the  decrees  of  doc- 
trine has  sometimes  been  confounded  with  that  regard- 
ing the  decrees  of  reformation  or  discipline."  As  to 
the  latter,  delays  and  reservations  took  place.  The  first 
country  to  receive  the  decrees  of  the  council  as  a  whole, 
was  the  Republic  of  Venice.  France  accepted  the  dis- 
ciplinary decrees  only  piecemeal  and  at  intervals. 

The  canons  and  decrees  of  the  council  of  Trent  were 
issued  in  Latin,  and  have  been  reprinted  innumerable 
times.  They  have  also  been  translated  into  almost 
every  modern  language.  One  of  the  supplementary 
works  assigned  to  the  Pope  by  the  council  at  its  break- 
ing up,  was  the  completion  of  a  catechism  for  the  use  of 
parish  priests  and  preachers.  This  work  has  not  all 
the  authority  of  the  council,  but  it  is  of  the  very  highest 
credit,  and  is  extensively  used,  having,  like  the  canons 
and  decrees,  been  very  generally  translated.  Another 
similar  work  was  the  publication  of  an  authentic  edition 
of  the  Vulgate  version  of  the  Bible,  as  well  as  of  the 
Breviary  and  Missal.  All  these  have  been  accomplished 
at  intervals  ;  and  there  is  besides  at  Rome  a  permanent 
tribunal,  a  congregation  of  cardinals,  styled  "  Congrega- 


250 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


tio  Interprcs  Concilii  Trideniini,"  to  which  belongs  the 
duty  of  dealing  with  all  questions  which  arise  as  to  the 
meaning,  the  authority,  or  the  effect  of  the  canons  and 
decrees  of  this  celebrated  council.  (Chambers'  Encyclo- 
pedia, vol.  ix.,  p.  534.) 

It  would  occupy  entirely  too  much  space  to  give  the 
dry  and  uninteresting  details  of  this  council.  But  we 
have  given  a  faithful  outline  of  its  proceedings.  Suffice 
to  say  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  of  the  present 
day  is  but  a  counterpart,  theologically  and  morally,  of 
the  council  of  Trent.  During  the  various  sittings  of 
the  sessions,  such  questions  as  these  were  discussed:  the 
personal  sin  of  Adam ;  original  sin ;  the  immaculate 
conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary;  non-resident  bishops; 
justification  as  opposed  to  Luther  and  other  reformers ; 
infant  baptism  ;  the  validity  of  baptism ;  the  conferring  of 
grace  by  the  sacraments;  transubstantiation  as  opposed 
to  consubstantiation ;  extreme  unction ;  priestly  vest- 
ments ;  a  visible  priesthood ;  whether  the  cup  should 
be  given  to  the  laity  at  the  communion  ;  pictures  and 
images  ;  a  general  overhauling  of  the  theology  of  Luther 
and  Zwingle  and  Melancthon. 

The  importance  of  the  so-called  ecumenical  councils 
has  often  been  greatly  over-estimated,  not  only  by  the 
Greeks  and  Roman  Catholics,  but  also  by  many  Protest- 
ants. John  Jortin,  D.  D.,  an  eminent  preacher  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  and  of  the  Church  of  England,  tells 
us  very  forcibly  that  councils  "were  a  collection  of 
men  who  were  frail  and  fallible.  Some  of  these  councils 
were  not  assemblies  of  pious  and  learned  divines,  but 
cabals,  the  majority  of  which  were  quarrelsome,  fanati- 
cal, domineering,  dishonest  prelates,  who  wanted  to 
compel  men  to  approve  all  their  opinions,  of  which  they 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


251 


themselves  had  no  clear  conceptions,  and  to  anathema- 
tize and  oppose  those  who  would  not  implicitly  submit 
to  their  determinations."    (Works,  vol.  iii.,  charge  2.) 

The  Romanists  hold  that  the  Pope  alone  can  convene 
and  conduct  ecumenical  councils,  which  are  supposed, 
on  their  theory,  to  represent  the  universal  Church  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  matters  of  faith, 
councils  profess  to  be  guided  by  the  Holy  Scriptures 
and  the  traditions  of  the  Church,  while  in  lighter  mat- 
ters human  reason  and  expediency  are  consulted.  In 
matters  of  faith,  ecumenical  councils  are  held  to  be  infal- 
lible, and  hence  it  is  maintained  that  all  such  synods 
have  agreed  together;  but  in  matters  of  discipline,  etc., 
the  authority  of  the  latest  council  prevails.  The  Roman 
claim  is  not  sanctioned  by  history.  The  emperors  called 
the  first  seven  councils,  and  either  presided  over  them 
in  person  or  by  commissioners;  and  the  final  ratifi^cation 
of  the  decisions  was  also  left  to  the  Emperor.  But  the 
Greek  Church  agrees  with  the  Latin  in  ascribing  abso- 
lute authority  to  the  decisions  of  truly  ecumenical  coun- 
cils. Gregory  of  Nazianzus  (who  was  president  for  a 
time  of  the  second  ecumenical  council)  speaks  strongly 
of  the  evils  to  which  such  assemblies  are  liable.  He 
says:  '•'lam  inclined  to  avoid  conventions  of  bishops ;  I 
never  knew  one  that  did  not  come  to  a  bad  end,  and  create 
more  disorders  than  it  attempted  to  rectify''  A  remark- 
able view  of  the  authority  of  councils  was  that  of  Nico- 
las of  Clamengis,  vis.^  that  they,  in  his  opinion,  could 
claim  regard  for  their  resolutions  only  if  the  members 
were  really  believers,  and  if  they  were  more  concerned 
for  the  salvation  of  souls  than  for  secular  interests.  His 
views  on  general  councils  were  fully  set  forth  in  a  little 
work  entitled  :  Disputatio  de  concilio  generali,  which  con-^ 


252 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


sists  of  three  letters,  addressed  in  141 5  or  1416,  to  a 
professor  at  the  Paris  University  (printed  apparently  at 
Vienna  in  1482).  He  not  only  places  the  authority  of 
general  councils  over  the  authority  of  the  popes,  but  the 
authority  of  the  Bible  over  the  authority  of  the  councils. 
He  doubts  whether  at  all  the  former  ecumenical  coun- 
cils the  Holy  Spirit  really  presided,  as  the  Holy  Spirit 
would  not  assist  men  pursuing  secular  aims.  He  denies 
that  a  council  composed  of  such  men  represents  the 
Church,  and  asserts  that  God  alone  knows  who  are  his 
people,  and  where  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells,  and  that  there 
may  be  times  when  the  Church  can  only  be  found  in 
one  single  woman.  After  the  lapse  of  over  three  hun- 
dred years,  the  Pope  in  1867  signified  his  purpose  to 
summon  another  ecumenical  (or  universal)  council ; 
but  of  course  none  but  Roman  bishops  attended  it. 
.(McCHntock  and  Strong's  Encyclopedia,  vol.  ii.,  p.  539.) 


THE 

PRIMITIYE  CHURCH 

— AND — 

INNOVATIONS. 


SECOND  PART. 


Tlje  Prinjitive  Churclj  and  Innovatiorjs. 


HOLY  WATER. 


So  little  is  known  by  the  general  reader  of  the  consti- 
tution and  character  of  the  primitive  Church,  as  estab- 
lished by  the  apostles,  and  so  ignorant  are  the  common 
mass  of  mankind  (of  the  Christian  world)  of  the  great 
apostasy  which,  in  the  first  centuries  of  the  Christian 
Era,  overtook  the  apostolic  Church,  which  finally  cul- 
minated in  the  Papacy,  that  we  have  concluded  to  write 
a  series  of  articles  on  a  question  so  profoundly  import- 
ant to  the  religious  world,  and  on  a  subject  so  intensely 
interesting  to  every  inquirer  in  pursuit  of  the  truth. 
As  the  question  is  one  of  great  length  and  latitude,  and 
one  which  runs  back  through  the  Dark  Ages,  spanning 
time  between  the  apostolic  and  the  present  age,  it  is  our 
intention  to  trace  out  the  origin  of  all  human  tradition, 
and  of  all  ecclesiastical  dogmas,  and  of  pagan  supersti- 
tion, such  as  the  origin  of  the  intercession  of  saints,  the 
Papal  primacy,  transubstantiation,  invocation  of  saints, 
the  mass,  indulgences,  image  worship,  purgatory,  pray- 
ing for  the  dead,  auricular  confession,  extreme  unction, 
holy  water,  celibacy,  canonization  of  saints,  baptism  of 
bells,  wax  tapers,  etc.  In  this  enlightened  and  inquisi- 
tive age  people  wish  to  know  the  cause  and  the  reason 
of  things.  But  we  are  not  writing  for  those  who  love 
darkness  rather  than  light. 

(255) 


256 


HOLV  WATER. 


Jesus  Christ  is  the  foundation  and  the  center  of  che 
Christian  rehgion — of  the  remedial  system  of  salvation. 
He  is  "the  brightness  of  his  Father's  glory,  and  the 
express  image  of  his  person."  He  is  our  infallible  Law- 
giver. He  is  invested  with  all  authority.  There  is  no 
appeal  from  his  word.  We  only  know  of  him  and  of 
his  precepts  as  we  receive  knowledge  from  the  united 
and  consistent  testimonies  of  those  who  have  recorded  his 
acts  and  teachings,  as  eye  and  ear  witnesses;  or,  as  in 
the  case  of  Luke,  from  the  testimony  of  those  who  had 
the  advantage  of  daily  and  personal  intercourse  with  the 
Savior  of  men.  Before  the  apostles  passed  away,  after 
they  had  established  the  Church  of  Christ  upon  an 
impregnable  basis,  they,  with  other  inspired  historians, 
left  us,  in  writing,  an  inspired  book,  or  number  of  books, 
to  infallibly  guide  us  in  the  right  way;  the  magna  chafta 
of  heaven,  to  tell  us  how  to  become  the  loyal  subjects 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  how  to  walk  and  live  in  the  fear  of 
God.  These  inspired  writers  of  infallible  truths  acknowl- 
edged no  object  of  adoration  but  the  invisible  and  eter- 
nal God;  they  knew  no  intercessor  but  the  "High 
Priest  of  our  salvation";  they  knew  of  no  expiatory 
sacrifice  but  the  Lamb  of  God  ;  no  other  method  of  jus- 
tification was  revealed  to  them  save  the  grace  of  God 
which  comes  through  the  medium  of  faith.  We  read 
of  no  altar  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  nor  of  image  worship 
in  consecrated  temples,  nor  of  a  "  Universal  Bishop  "  in 
the  Church  of  God ;  nor  hear  of  souls  in  purgatory,  not 
of  a  queen  in  heaven,  nor  of  the  stored-away  merits  of 
dead  and  living  saints,  nor  of  vain  and  pompous  cere 
monies.  The  greatest  ornaments  in  the  primitive  con- 
gregations were  simplicity  of  doctrine  and  purity  of  life. 

We  stand  immovably  upon  the  ground   that  any 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


257 


deviation  from  the  written  and  inspired  word  of  God 
must,  by  logical  necessity,  and  in  the  very  nature  of 
things,  be  based  on  human  invention  and  on  the  desire 
to  glory  in  the  things  of  men  rather  than  in  the  things 
of  God.  What  has  been  added  to  the  word  is  "wood, 
hay  and  stubble."  The  introduction  of  Jewish  and 
pagan  rites  and  ceremonies  by  the  early  converts  to 
Christianity,  the  glare  and  pomp  of  heathen  practices, 
the  dense  ignorance  of  the  people  on  the  question  of  a 
divine  revelation,  and  the  connivance  or  craft  of  those 
who  would  be  teachers  in  things  divine,  mixed  with 
things  secular,  gradually  obscured  the  word  of  God, 
under  the  guise  of  tradition.  Innovations  were  intro- 
duced by  slow  degrees ;  and,  step  by  step,  we  see  the 
"man  of  sin"  developing,  until  finally  there  looms  up 
in  the  horizon  that  huge  deformity  called  Popery. 

Justin  Martyr  (A.  D.  130),  in  the  following  words, 
delineates  the  beautiful  simplicity  of  the  worship  of  the 
apostolic  age : 

On  the  day  that  is  called  Sunday,  there  is  an  assembly  in  the  same 
place,  of  those  who  dwell  in  towns  or  in  the  country  ;  and  the  histories 
of  the  apostles  and  the  writings  of  the  prophets  are  read,  whilst  the 
time  permits;  then  the  reading  ceasing,  the  president  verbally  admon- 
ishes and  exhorts  the  imitation  of  these  good  things.  Then  we  all  rise 
in  common  and  offer  prayers,  bread  and  wine  and  water  are  offered, 
and  the  president  offers  prayers  and  thanksgivings,  as  far  as  it  is  in  his 
power  to  do  so,  and  the  people  joyfully  cry  out,  saying,  Amen.  And 
the  distribution  and  the  communication  is  to  each  of  those  who  have 
returned  thanks,  and  it  is  sent  by  tlie  deacons  to  those  who  are  not 
present.  And  this  food  is  called  by  us  the  eucharist.  And  in  all  that 
we  offer  we  bless  the  Maker  of  all  things  by  his  Son  Jesus  Clirist  and 
by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Of  those  who  are  rich  and  willing,  each,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  pleasure,  contributes;  and  what  is  thus  collected  is  put 
away  by  the  president,  and  he  assists  the  orphans  and  widows,  and 
those  who,  through  sickness  or  any  other  cause,  are  destitute.  (Second 
Apology  for  Christians,  p.  97,  Paris,  1615.) 
18 


258 


HOLY  WATER. 


Such  was  the  simplicity  of  worship  in  those  early 
days — the  simplicity  of  worship  whicli  thousands  are 
now  longing  for ;  but  even  here  we  trace  an  innovation, 
in  the  addition  of  water  to  the  wine,  a  practice  not 
known  among  apostolic  institutions.  It  has  been  seen 
(about  A.  D.  no)  that  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  formed  an  important  part  of  the  worship  in  the 
primitive  Church.  In  that  memorial  institution  Christ 
Jesus — the  Savior  of  men — the  only  hope  of  the  world 
— was  the  central  figure  of  adoration,  and  the  affections 
of  the  disciples  centered  in  him.  We  read  of  no  pastor 
or  clergyman  being  present  in  that  worship;  we  read  of 
no  organ,  of  no  select  choir,  of  no  duets  and  quartettes, 
and  of  no  gorgeous  architecture  and  splendid  drapery. 
The  Jews,  when  they  made  their  solemn  appearances 
before  God,  took  offerings  with  them,  usually  the  pro- 
duce of  the  earth,  in  token  of  their  grateful  acknowledg- 
ment of  daily  mercies.  The  early  Christians,  the 
greater  part  of  whom  were  of  Jewish  birth,  retained  this 
custom  ;  and,  at  the  public  assemblies,  brought  with 
them  bread  and  wine,  fruits,  corn  and  grain.  These, 
when  consecrated  by  prayer,  seem  to  have  been  used  in 
part  for  the  communion,  and  the  rest  distributed  to  the 
poor,*  etc. 

The  gifts  thus  brought  retained  the  name  of  offerings, 
and  from  this  simple  beginning  we  can  trace  the  com- 
plicated superstitions  of  the  Mass.  From  these  offerings 
the  "eucharist  "  (Lord's  Supper)  was  called  an  oblation, 
afterward  a  sacrifice,  gratulatory  and  not  expiatory.  It 
was  the  offering  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  not  of  the 
body  of  Christ — though  this  furnished  a  pretense  for 

*PlaflE,  Dissert,  de  Oblat.,  etc.;  in  his  Stigmata  Dissert.  Theologia. 
Stut.,  1720. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.     ,  259 

changing-  the  Supper  into  a  sacrifice,  by  reason  of  the 
several  attendant  circumstances  connected  with  the  ser- 
vices, as  hereafter  to  be  stated,  when  we  come  to  A.  D. 
7S7. 

Platina,  in  his  "Lives  of  the  Popes,"  attributes  the 
introduction  of  the  use  of  /lo/y  ivater  to  Alexander  I.* 
(A.  D.  108-117.)  The  authority  for  this  statement  is  a 
decretal  epistle  of  doubtful  authenticity,  to  say  the  least 
of  it  (says  Collette,  the  author  of  The  Novelties  of 
Romanistri).  But  even  if  introduced,  the  practice  was 
condemned  by  some  of  the  subsequent  Fathers  as  a 
pagan  custom.  The  Emperor  Julian,  to  spite  the  Chris- 
tians, ordered  the  provisions  in  the  market  to  be  sprink- 
led with  Jioly  water  from  the  heathen  temples,  on  purpose, 
as  Middleton  observes,  either  to  starve  them,  or  force 
them  to  eat  what  they  esteemed  polluted.  The  use  of 
holy  water  by  the  heathens  at  the  entrance  of  their 
temples,  to  sprinkle  themselves  with,  is  admitted  by 
Montfangon  and  the  Jesuit,  La  Cerda — the  latter,  in  his 
notes  on  a  passage  of  Virgil  where  this  practice  is  men- 
tioned, says:  "  Hence  was  derived  the  custom  of  Holy 
Church  to  provide  purifying  or  holy  water  at  the 
entrance  of  their  churches."  The  modern  priests  use 
the  same  "  aspergillium, "  or  sprinkler,  which  was  used 
by  pagan  priests  for  the  same  purpose,  as  seen  on 
ancient  bas-reliefs  and  coins.  The  Indians,  the  Brah- 
mins, et  al.,  also  use  holy  water  in  sprinkling  their 
houses,  etc.,  and  believe  that  they  can  thereby  wipe 
out  their  sins.f    But  the  abuse  of  this  custom  did  not 

•In  the  Clementine  Constitutions  the  authorship  of  the  Holy  Water  is 
attributed  to  St.  Matthew.  Lib.  viii.,  chap,  xxix.,  in  Labb.  Concil., 
torn,  i.,  col.  484.    Lutet.,  Paris,  1671. 

fPicard's  Ceremonies  et  Costumes  Religieuse,  vol.  i.,  p.  18,  note  6.  . 
Amsterdam,  1723. 


26o 


HOLY  WATER. 


take  place  until  some  centuries  after — in  the  ninth  cert' 
tury,  as  we  shall  eventually  see. 

Whatever  might  have  been  the  first  intention  of  the 
originators  of  the  custom  (says  Collette),  it  is  very  cer- 
tain that  the  present  use  is  mingled  with  the  grossest 
superstitions.  Marsilius  Columna,  Archbishop  of  Sa- 
lerno, attributes  to  the  use  of  holy  water  seven  spiritual 
virtues:  (i)  to  frighten  away  devils;  (2)  to  remit  venial 
sins  ;  (3)  to  cure  distractions  ;  (4)  to  elevate  the  mind  ; 
(5)  to  dispose  it  to  devotion ;  (6)  to  obtain  grace  ;  (7)  to 
prepare  for  the  sacrament.  As  to  corporal  gifts :  (a) 
to  cure  barrenness ;  (b)  to  multiply  goods;  (c)  to  procure 
health;  (d)  to  purge  the  air  from  pestilential  vapors.* 
There  are  other  virtues  attributed  to  holy  water  that  are 
not  fit  to  be  spoken  of  to  modest  ears,  f 

Even  at  this  early  period,  various  heresies  existed  in 
the  Church,  such  as  the  Valentinian,  the  Gnostic  and 
the  Eucratite.  These  heretics  declared  against  marriage 
and  forbade  eating  flesh.  The  Montanists  were  likewise 
enemies  to  marriage,  especially  of  the  clergy.  Almost 
all  the  present  Papal  heresies  existed  in  some  form  or 
other  during  these  early  periods,  either  among  the 
pagans  or  Jews,  or  one  or  other  of  the  heretical  sects. 
We  shall  see  how  and  when  they  were  successfully 
engrafted  on  the  teaching  of  the  apostles.  Cardinal 
Baronias,  in  his  Annals  under  the  A.  D.  740,  says  that 
"It  is  allowable  for  the  Church  to  transfer  to  pious  uses 
those  ceremonies  which  the  pagans  employed  impiously 
to  superstitious  worship,  after  they  had  been  purified  by 

•Marsilius  Columna,  Hydragialog,  s.  iii.,  o.  ii.,  p.  281,  etc.  Rom., 
1686. 

tSee  Domenico  Magri  Notigia  de  Vocaboli  Ecclesiastici  in  qu»  Bene- 
dict*;  p.  41.    Eom.,  1669. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


^consecration ;  for  the  devil  is  more  mortified  to  see 
those  things  returned  to  the  service  of  Jesus  Christ, 
which  were  instituted  for  his  own."* 

•Referring  to  pagan  ceremonies,  he  says:  "Consulto  introductum 
videtur,  ut  quae  erant  Gentilatiae  superstitionis  officia,  eadem  veri  Dei 
.cuUai  sanctiiicata  in  yerae  religionis  cultum  impend ereatum."  Baroa : 
Annales,  torn,  ii.,  p.  384,  col.  i.    Luc,  1738. 


FAST  OF  LENT. 


About  A.  D.  140,  Telsephorus,  bishop  of  Rome, 
instituted  the  fast  of  Lent  upon  a  pretended  tradition  of 
the  apostles.  Fasts  and  festivals  were  instituted  and 
practiced  by  both  the  Jews  and  pagans.  Concerning 
the  fast  of  Lent,  more  hereafter. 

The  latter  part  of  the  second  century  was  a  period  of 
violent  persecutions  and  martyrdom.  It  was  a  custom 
of  the  Greeks  to  celebrate  the  memory  of  their  heroes 
at  their  tombs,  with  a  view  of  exciting  the  survivors  to 
emulate  their  deeds  of  valor.  Hence  Christians,  in 
order  to  encourage  each  other  to  suffer  death  for  the 
name  of  Christ,  thought  they  ought  to  imitate  this 
Greek  custom.  They  gathered  such  of  the  relics  of  the 
martyrs  as  could  be  saved,  and  gave  them  honorable 
burial,  as  they  supposed.  An  annual  commemoration, 
called  the  day  of  their  nativity,  or  birthday  to  heaven, 
at  their  tombs  or  at  their  place  of  martyrdom,  was  then 
celebrated  on  the  days  of  their  death.*  At  their 
assemblies,  after  prayer  and  exposition  of  the  Scriptures, 
they  rehearsed  in  order  the  names  of  the  martyrs  and 
their  deeds.  After  which  thanksgivings  were  then 
offered  to  God  for  having  given  victory.  The  proceed- 
ings terminated  with  the  celebration  of  the  "eucharist." 
Obviously  the  intention  of  these  solemn  meetings  was 
to  convey  the  idea  that  those  who  died  in  the  hope  of 
the  gospel  lived  with  the  Lord,  and  in  the  memory  of 

*Tertullian,  De  Cor.  Militis,  Edit.  Roth.,  1662.  p.  289. 

(262) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


263 


the  brotherhood,  and  to  excite  their  surviving  friends  to 
remain  constant  and  faithful.  Says  Eusebius:  "There 
[namely,  where  their  bones  were  deposited],  if  it  be 
possible,  meeting  together  in  joy  and  gladness,  the 
Lord  grant  us  to  celebrate  the  birthday  of  this  martyr- 
dom, both  in  memory  of  those  who  have  wrestled  before 
us,  and  for  the  exercise  and  preparation  of  those  that 
come  after."*  No  religious  worship  was  rendered  to 
the  martyrs  themselves  at  the  first ;  for  Eusebius,  in  the 
treatise  last  referred  to,  thus  expresses  himself,  touching 
these  ceremonies:  "We  are  taught  to  worship  God 
only,  and  to  honor  those  blessed  powers  that  are  about 
him  with  such  honor  as  is  fit  and  agreeable  to  their 
estate  and  condition. "  And  again  :  "  To  God  only  will 
we  give  the  worship  due  unto  his  name,  and  him  only 
do  we  religiously  worship  and  adore,  "f  Following  this 
apparently  harmless  practice,  prayers  for  the  dead  were 
instituted;  next  came  intercession  for  the  departed;  and, 
in  the  course  of  time,  there  came  the  sacrifice  of  the  inass, 
as  now  practiced  by  the  Roman  hierarchy. 

About  the  year  A.  D.  200,  offerings  began  to  be 
presented  at  the  celebrations  in  memory  of  martyrs ;  the 
action,  however,  still  being  one  of  commemoration 
only.  Hence  arose  the  custom  of  offerings  for  the  dead. 
These  offerings  were  generally  made  by  the  parents  of 
the  deceased,  t  The  gifts  were  distributed  to  the  poor. 
From  this  arose  saints'  days.  The  transition  to  prayers 
for  the  dead  was  made  easy ;  and  this  was  the  first  great 
innovation  which  invaded  the  sanctity  of  the  apostolic 

*EusebiuB,  Eccl.  Hist.,  lib.  v.,  c.  ix.;  and  lib.  iv.,  c.  xv.   Paris,  1659. 
tEuseb.,  De  Prsep.  Evang.,  lib.  iv.,  c.  x.,  p.  88.    Edit.  Stephani, 
Paris,  1544. 

JXeander's  Church  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  469,  470.    London,  IS.jl. 


264 


FAST  OF  LENT. 


Church.  It  is  important  to  observe  that  it  is  honestly 
admitted  by  Tertullian,  a  celebrated  writer  of  this  age, 
that  this  practice  was  founded  on  custom,  and  not  on 
the  Scriptures,*  and  was,  therefore,  called  a  tradition. 
It  is  to  be  noted  that,  though  some  Christians  did  now 
begin  to  pray  for  the  dead,  it  was  not  that  they  should 
be  freed  from  the  pains  of  purgatory.  It  was  a  common 
belief  that  departed  souls  did  not  enjoy  the  beatific 
vision  until  the  day  of  resurrection  and  the  last  judg- 
ment; but  there  is  no  trace  of  a  belief  at  this  period 
that  they  were  in  a  place  of  torment,  f  They  prayed 
for  the  consumnation  of  their  glory,  and  that  they  them- 
selves might  join  the  departed  in  the  resurrection  of  the 
just— a  custom  having  no  sanction  in  Scripture,  but  still 
differing  widely  from  the  modern  practice  and  intention 
of  praying  for  the  dead. 

The  next  step  in  advance  (A.  D.  240)  was  a  mistaken 
zeal  of  martyrs  and  others  in  the  prospect  of  death. 
They  began  to  make  mutual  agreements  that  he  who 
should  first  depart  should  remember  the  survivor,  and 
implore  God  in  his  behalf  when  he  found  himself  in  the 
next  world.  J  Here  we  have  the  beginning  of  interces- 
sion of  saints,  but  it  was  the  departed  for  the  living. 

•Tertullian,  De  Cor.  Militis,  cap.  iii.,  p.  121  D.   Paris,  1634. 
f  Jeremiah  Taylor's  Works,  "  Dissuasion  from  Popery,"  c.  i.,  sec. 
iv.    Edit,  by  Heber,  vol.  x.,  p.  149.    London,  1839. 
J  Cyprian,  Ep.  ad  Cornel.    Ep.  57,  p.  96.    Edit.  Paris,  1726. 


ORIGIN  OF  MONASTIC  VOWS,  PRIESTLY 
VESTMENTS  AND  THE  SIGN  OF 
THE  CROSS. 


About  the  year  250,  and  for  some  time  thereafter,  the 
bishop  of  Rome  took  upon  himself  to  interfere  in 
matters  which  had  been  adjudged  or  determined  by 
the  bishop  of  Africa.  Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage, 
opposed  this  newly-assumed  power,  and  denied  the 
right  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  intermeddle  with  the 
decisions  of  other  bishops  in  their  own  sees.  He  wrote 
to  the  bishop  of  Rome  and  told  him  that  "it  was 
decreed  by  the  African  bishops  that  every  case  was  to 
be  heard  where  the  crime  was  committed."*  These 
interferences  continued  for  some  time,  and  were  always 
resisted,  until  the  Council  of  Melevi,  in  Numidia  (A.D. 
415),  passed  a  decree,  signed  by  sixty  bishops,  among 
whom  was  St.  Augustine,  prohibiting  all  appeals  to  any 
other  tribunal  than  the  primate  of  the  province  where 
the  subject  matter  arose,  f  Of  the  primacy,  more  here- 
after. 

In  the  year  257  "the  hallowing  of  priests'  vestures 
and  altar  clothes,  with  other  ornaments  of  churches, 
was  taken  out  of  the  Hebrew  priesthood  and  used  in 
our  Church  first  by  Stephen,  the  first  bishop  of  Rome 
of  that  name.  For,  at  the  beginning,  priests,  in  their 
massing,  used  rather  inward  virtues  of  soul  than  outward 

•  Ep.  ad  Cornel,  p.  136,  Oxoa,  1682;  Paris  Edit.,  1836,  p.  73. 
f  Manse's  Councils,  torn,  iv.,  p.  507,  Venetiis,  1785. 

(26s) 


266 


ORIGIN  OF  MONASTIC  VOWS,  ETC. 


apparel  of  the  body,  which  is  rather  a  glorious  gaze 
than  any  godly  edifying."* 

In  consequence  of  the  persecutions  of  this  age  (A.  D. 
260),  some  began  to  seek  the  deserts,  and  a  monastic 
life  ensued.  Paul  was  the  first  hermit  who  fled  from 
Alexandria  into  the  desert,  on  account  of  the  persecu- 
tions in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Valerian.  Fleury, 
the  noted  Roman  Catholic  Church  historian,  canonist 
and  confessor  of  Louis  XV.,  A.  D.  17 16,  from  whose 
ecclesiastical  history  we  shall  have  frequent  occasion  to 
quote,  says:  "  Monasticism  was  introduced  into  favor 
mainly  by  the  influence  of  Athanasius  [A.  D.  370]  ;  but 
in  the  year  341,  the  profession  of  a  monk  was  despised 
at  Rome  as  a  novelty. "f  And  Polydore  Vergil  says: 
"  The  institution  of  this  state  of  things  came,  I  grant, 
of  a  good  zeal  to  godliness,  but  the  evil  perverter  of  all 
good  things  did  so  empoison  the  hearts  of  them  that 
followed,  that  they  had  more  trust  in  their  monks  than 
faith  in  Christ's  blood ;  and  then  every  man  began  new 
rules  of  monks  to  be  their  own  saviors,  and  went  so 
superstitiously  to  work  that  it  was  out  of  rule  and 
abominable  in  the  sight  of  God."| 

At  this  period,  Christians  being  much  mixed  with 
pagans,  and  suffering  from  their  taunts  and  persecutions, 
made  themselves  known  to  each  other  by  the  sign  of 
the  cross  on  the  forehead,  in  token  that  they  were  not 
ashamed  of  the  cross  of  Christ.  It  was  a  sort  of  badge 
of  their  profession,  and  a  silent  calling  on  the  name  of 
Christ.  There  was  no  virtue  attributed  to  the  action, 
but  simply  a  profession  of  Christ  made,  whose  name 

*  Polydore  Vergil,  b.  vi.,  c.  viii.,  p.  136.    London,  1551. 

t  Fleury,  Histoire  Eccl.,  Paris,  1722-1734,  torn,  iii.,  pp.  340,  341. 

J  Polydore  Vergil,  b.  viii.,  c.  i.,  p  131,  London,  1551. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


267 


was  tacitly  invoked.  In  modern  times  the  original  cus- 
tom has  been  superstitiously  and  mischievously  per- 
verted. It  is  now  supposed  that  the  signing  of  the 
cross  drives  away  evil  spirits.  What  was  at  first  sup- 
posed to  be  harmless,  has  degenerated  into  a  gross 
superstition,  as  do  all  "harmless  innovations,"  such  as 
we  are  now  daily  encountering  in  the  very  current  of 
the  grand  reformation  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

It  was  about  this  time  (the  latter  part  of  the  third 
century)  that  a  custom  became  prevalent  from  which 
the  modern  theory  of  mdulgence  has  been  derived. 
Christians  who  had  been  convicted  of  crimes  were 
required  to  make  confession  of  them  publicly  before  the 
entire  congregation,  to  implore  pardon,  and  to  undergo 
whatever  punishment  the  church  thought  best  to  impose 
on  them.  This  was  done  as  well  for  example  as  to  pre- 
vent reproach  to  the  Christian  religion  among  infidels. 
These  punishments  were  not  supposed  tc  be  satisfactory 
to  God.  Such  an  idea  can  not  be  traced  in  any  of  the 
writers  of  the  age  who  mention  the  practice.  At  the 
latter  end  of  the  third  century,  when  many  had  lapsed, 
through  fear  of  persecution,  the  punishment  and  period 
of  probation  became  more  severe  and  lengthened  before 
they  were  readmitted.  Sometimes  the  period  was  pro- 
tracted for  a  series  of  years.  Hence,  arose  the  custom 
of  prescribing  times  or  periods — five,  ten  or  more  years 
— of  penance;  but,  lest  the  penitent  should  lose  heart, 
or  be  driven  to  despair,  the  bishops  took  upon  them- 
selves, under  certain  circumstances,  to  mitigate  the 
period  of  punishment.  This  act  was  termed  a  relaxa- 
tion or  remission.  It  was  not  till  long  after  this  that 
the  term  indulgence  was  substituted,  and  when  intro- 
duced it  was  in  a  far  different  sense  to  its  modern  use. 


268 


ORIGIN  OF  MONASTIC  VOWS,  ETC. 


It  signified  only  a  discharge,  or  a  mitigation,  of  ecclesi- 
astical censures  and  penalties  inflicted  by  the  Church, 
and  not  a  remission  of  the  penalty  due  to  God's  justice 
for  the  sin  of  the  penitent  which  had  been  forgiven, 
which  is  the  modern  Romish  idea.  But  the  transition 
from  one  to  the  other  can  well  be  comprehended  when 
we  find  craft  and  avarice  on  the  one  side,  and  supersti- 
tion and  ignorance  on  the  other.* 

As  to  the  various  orders  of  the  priesthood,  Polydore 
Vergil  (A.  D.  290)  says: 

The  bishops  of  Rome,  following  the  shadows  of  the  old  abrogated 
law  of  the  Hebrews,  have  ordained  a  swarm  of  divers  other  orders,  as 
porters  or  sextons,  readers,  exorcists,  acolytes,  sub-deacons,  deacons, 
priests,  bishops,  archbishops,  as  a  certain  degree,  one  above  another. 
Caius  [A.  D.  290],  bishop  of  Rome,  did  begin  the  orders  first ;  yet 
some  say  Hygenius  [A.  D.  140]  ordained  those  decrees  long  before 
Caius'  time.  Hygenius  might  be  the  first  deviser  of  them,  and  after- 
ward Caius  accomplished  the  work  and  brought  it  to  a  final  consum- 
mation.f 

Now  see  the  parallel  between  that  time  and  this.  As 
men  and  churches  depart  from  the  simplicity  of  the 
gospel,  there  comes  a  corresponding  demand  for  offices. 
Many  persons  can  be  induced  to  remain  in  the  Church, 
provided  you  give  them  honor  and  distinction,  with 
salaries  to  support  them  in  their  places  of  honor. 
Among  ourselves  the  demand  for  honor  and  distinction 
is  greater  than  the  supply,  although  we  have  the  Gen- 
eral Missionary  Convention,  with  its  officers;  the  State 
societies,  with  their  officers;  the  district  societies,  with 
their  officers ;  the  Foreign  Board,  with  its  officers ;  the 
Woman's  Board,  with  its  officers ;  auxiliary  societies, 

*  "  The  Novelties  of  Romanism,"  the  Religious  Tract  Society,  Lon- 
don, Collette,  p.  166. 

f  B.  iv.,  c.  iv.,  p.  88,  London,  1551. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


269 


with  their  officers ;  "officiary  boards  "  for  the  churches, 
and  presided  over  by  self-styled  bishops.  "Also  of 
your  own  selves  shall  men  arise,  speaking  perverse 
things,  to  draw  disciples  after  them." 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  MASS  AND  CELIBACY. 


We  now  come  into  the  fourth  century.  In  A.  D. 
300,  the  Emperor  Constantine  having  become  a  Chris- 
tian, nominally  at  least,  the  Church,  as  a  whole,  being 
released  temporarily  from  terrible  persecutions,  began  to 
assume  a  pageantry  and  splendor  out  of  all  harmony 
with  the  simplicity  of  the  persons  who  founded  the 
Church.  We  trace  now  more  frequently  the  terms  ''sac- 
rifice" and  "altar,"  though  still  used  in  a  different  sense 
from  their  modern  application.  We  pause  here  to  quote 
from  the  Novelties  of  Romanism,  p.  167,  as  relating  to 
the  matter  under  consideration  : 

When  the  word  "sacrifice  "  was  used  by  the  Fathers,  it  was  not  in 
the  sense  in  which  it  is  now  used  ;  and  this  is  evident  from  the  fact 
that  they  used  the  same  term  as  applied  to  "  baptism,"  as  admitted  by 
Melchior  Canus.  He  said  :  "  But  you  demand  what  cause  had  man\j 
of  the  ancient  Fathers  that  they  called  baptism  a  sacrifice,  and  therefore 
said  there  remained  no  more  sacrifice  for  sin,  because  baptism  can  not 
be  repeated.  Truly,  because  in  baptism  we  die  together  with  Christ, 
and  by  this  sn;Tament  the  sacrifice  of  the  cross  is  applied  unto  us  tu 
the  full  remission  of  sin,  hence  they  call  baptism  metaphorically  a 
sacrifice  (Canus'  Loc.  Theol.,  lib.  xii.,  fol.  424-426;  Louvan,  1569). 
And  for  the  same  purpose  did  they  call  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  a  sacrifice,  metaphorically  being  a  memorial  of  the  sacrifice  on 
the  cross. 

We  are  told  upon  the  pages  of  history  that  at  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century  freedom  from  perse- 
cution gave  opportunities  for  collecting  the  relics  of 
martyrs.  These  were  now  reinterred  under  the  commun- 
ion-table.   This  custom  was  of  decidedly  pagan  origin. 

(270) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


271 


A  similar  custom  among^  the  Athenians  is  related  by 
Plutarch  in  his  life  of  Theseus ;  and  as  they  did  of  old 
with  their  pagan  heroes,  so  the  modern  Romanists 
deposit  relics  of  the  so  called  saints,  supplemented  with 
processions  and  sacrifices.  The  building  of  church 
chapels  led  to  superstitious  consecrations,  and  other 
]fsenseless  ceremonies,  which,  no  doubt,  according  to 
modern  parlance,  were  the  product  of  "sanctified  com- 
mon sense."  Eusebius  informs  us  that  "this  Emperor 
[Constantine],  to  make  the  Christian  religion  more 
plausible  to  the  Gentiles,  adopted  the  exterior  ornaments 
which  they  used  in  their  religion."  The  consecration 
of  churches  (temples),  accompanied  by  superstitious 
rites,  is  unquestionably  of  pagan  origin  ;  the  vestal  vir- 
gins sprinkled  the  ground  with  lustral  water;  and  now 
lustral  water  is  sprinkled  upon  helpless,  unreasoning 
babes  in  Protestant  churches,  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ ! 

In  325  the  famous  Council  of  Nice  met  with  the 
express  purpose  of  settling  certain  points  of  discipline. 
It  was  determined  that  the  bishop  of  each  metropolitan 
church  should  rule  the  district  attached  to  that  church, 
and  be  independent,  in  his  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  of 
of  any  other  bishop.*  Rome,  however,  by  virtue  of 
being  the  acknowledged  seat  of  empire,  enjoyed  a  pre- 
cedence of  honor,  but  not  of  ecclesiastical  rank.  The 
bishop  of  Constantinople,  by  conciliar  decree,  enjoyed 
the  same  primacy  and  ecclesiastical  prerogatives  with  the 
bishop  of  Rome,  t  This  decree  is  important,  for  not 
only  did  it  declare  the  rights  of  the  See  of  Constanti- 
nople, but  it  expressly  points  out  the  nature  of  the  pre- 

•Labb.  et  Coss.,  torn,  ii.,  col.  32.    Paris,  1671. 

tCouncil  Chal.,  can.  28  ;  ibid.,  torn,  iv.,  col.  769.    Paris,  1671. 


2/2 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  MASS  AND  CELIBACY. 


cedency  enjoyed  by  Rome — a  precedency  arising  fronr 
the  fact  of  Rome  having  been  the  seat  of  empire.  This 
precedency  was  now  shared  by  Constantinople  for  the 
same  reason.  It  is  unnecessary  to  reproduce  here  the 
twenty-eighth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  which  con- 
tains the  decree  alluded  to. 

It  was  at  this  council  that  the  question  of  the  celibacy 
of  the  clergy  was  seriously  mooted.  Marriage  was  then 
allowed  to  all,  though  it  had  been  previously  the  subject 
of  discussion.  The  Council  of  Elvira,  in  Spain,  A.  D. 
305,  was  the  first  to  announce  the  law  that  the  clergy  of 
the  first  three  grades  should  abstain  from  all  marriage 
intercourse,  or  be  deposed  (Neander's  Church  History, 
vol.  iii.,  p.  208,  London,  185  i).  The  other  orders  were 
left  to  the  free  choice  of  each  individual.  By  the  Coun- 
cil of  Neo-Caesarea  (A.  D.  314),  presbyters  were  not 
allowed  to  marry ;  and  it  enjoined  the  degradation  of 
priests  who  married  after  ordination.  *  Ecclesiastics,  on 
taking  their  charge,  stated  whether  they  would  refrain 
from  marrying  or  not ;  if  they  answered  that  they  would 
refrain,  they  were  not  allowed  to  marry ;  otherwise, 
they  were  allowed.  The  question  first  arose  in  conse- 
quence of  the  fearful  persecutions  of  the  times,  and  alsor 
in  consequence  of  the  extreme  poverty  of  the  congrega- 
tions. At  the  Council  of  Nice,  however,  it  was  dis- 
cussed whether  celibacy  should  be  made  compulsory. 
Bishop  Paphnutias  protested  against  a  law  being  passed 
on  the  subject,  on  the  ground  that  such  an  unnatural 
prohibition  would  produce  great  immorality,  and  was 
contrary  to  the  Holy  Scriptures.f  The  custom  was  not 
universally  received,   but  here  is  where  the  hideous 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Council,  torn,  i.,  col.  1479.    Paris,  1671. 
fSosomen,  Hist.  Eccles.,  lib.  i..  cap.  xxiii.,  p.  41.    Cantab,  1720 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


dogma  first  began  to  develop  Even  so  late  as  A.  D. 
692,  at  the  Sixth  General  Council,  it  was  decreed  by 
the  thirteenth  canon  that  they  should  be  deposed  who 
should  presume  to  deprive  deacons  and  priests,  after  the 
receiving  of  orders,  of  the  company  of  their  lawful 
wives,  and  that  they  who,  after  the  taking  of  orders, 
under  the  pretense  of  greater  holiness,  should  put  away 
their  wives,  should  be  deposed  and  properly  excommu- 
nicated.* In  fact,  the  Roman  canon  law  did  admit  that 
the  marriage  of  the  clergy  is  not  prohibited  by  the  law, 
the  gospel,  or  the  apostles,  but  that  it  is  strictly  prohib- 
ited by  "the  Church. "f 

Celibacy  was  most  esteemed  among  the  heathen  phi- 
losophers. Jerome,  in  his  second  book  against  Jovinian, 
relates  some  curious  customs  practiced  by  the  Athenian 
and  Egyptian  priests.  Josephus  and  Pliny  also  inform 
us  of  the  customs  of  the  Jewish  Church  with  regard  to 
this  subject.  Constantine,  in  the  commemoration  of 
the  Passion,  first  ordered  Friday  to  be  held  as  a  solemn 
feast.  The  feast  days  Good  Friday  and  Easter  (Oester, 
the  name  of  a  German  god)  are  both  of  pagan  origin ; 
and  yet  Christians,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  perpetuate  these  pagan  festivals  ! 

About  A.  D.  350  there  were  three  classes  of  persons 
who  were  not  permitted  to  partake  of  the  "eucharist," 
or  Lord's  Supper,  viz.:  the  Cathecumens,  or  those  under 
instruction ;  the  Penitents,  not  as  yet  received  into 
church  communion;  and  Demoniacs,  or  those  supposed 
to  be  possessed  with  wicked  spirits.  The  sermon  being 
ended,  the  deacon  intimated  to  these  that  they  should 

•Can.  xiii.,  Concl.  in  Trulla,  A.  D.  692,  col.  947,  E.,  torn.  xi. 
Mansi,  Florentiae,  1765. 
fDecreti  Secunda  Pars.,  Cause  xxvi.,  q.  ii.,  c.  i.,  fol.  884. 
19 


274 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  MASS  AND  CELIBACY. 


withdraw,  dismissing  them  with  these  words,  "Ite  missa 
est" — a  valedictory  expression,  or  solemn  leave-taking 
of  them,  which  did  not  apply  to  the  ceremony  which 
followed.  In  succeeding  ages  those  words  began  to  be 
contracted  into  mass,  and  the  eucharist,  which  followed, 
was  called  from  thence  the  mass.^  Even  this  is  of  pagan 
origin.  In  the  work  by  which  Apuleias,  a  Platonic 
philosopher  of  the  second  century,  made  himself  best 
known,  entitled  '^'De  Asino  Aureo" — The  Golden  Ass, 
we  read  that,  in  imitation  of  an  old  ceremony  among  the 
Greeks,  when  the  worship  of  Isis  was  concluded,  the 
people  were  dismissed  by  two  Greek  words  signifying 
their  discharge.  The  pagan  Romans,  when  their  devo- 
tions were  concluded,  discharged  the  throng  with  the 
words,  ^'Ite  niissio  est."  This,  by  gradual  corruption, 
passed  into  massa.    Polydore  Virgil  says : 

When  the  mass  is  ended,  the  deacon,  turning  to  the  people,  sayeth, 
"lie  missa  est,"  which  words  are  borrowed  from  the  rite  of  the  pagans, 
and  signifieth  that  then  the  company  may  be  dismissed.  It  was  used 
in  the  sacrifices  of  Isis,  that  when  the  observances  were  duly  and  fully 
performed  and  accomplished,  then  the  minister  of  religion  should  give 
warning  or  a  watchword  what  time  they  should  lawfully  depart.  And 
of  this  springs  our  custom  of  singing  Ite  missa  est  for  a  certain  significa- 
tion that  the  full  service  was  finished.! 

Fleury,  the  French  historian,  fixes  366  as  the  date  of 
the  actual  beginning  of  the  so-called  appellate  authority 
or  jurisdiction  of  the  bishop  of  Rome.  He  says  that 
the  Emperor  Valentinian  ordered  that  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  with  his  colleagues,  should  examine  the  causes 
of  other  bishops.  +    The  decree  empowered  (in  matters 

*Neander,  in  his  Church  History,  gives  this  as  the  origin  of  the 
term.    See  vol.  iii.,  p.  461,  note.    London,  1851. 
fBook  v.,  c.  ii.,  p.  110.  Edit.  London,  15.51. 
JFleury,  Eccles.  Hist.,  torn,  ir.,  p.  146.  Paris,  17X4. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


2;5 


not  canonical)  the  metropolitan  bishops  to  judge  the 
inferior  clergy,  and  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  judge  the 
metropolitan  bishops,  or  the  diocesan  bishops  who  occu- 
pied cities  inferior  to  Rome  ;  but  this  only  extended  the 
jurisdiction  of  Rome  westward.  This  privilege,  says 
Fleury,  was  conceded  to  Damasus,  wliose  election  was 
by  no  means  canonical.  At  a  council  subsequently  held 
at  Rome  (378),  Damasus  addressed  a  memorial  to  the 
Emperor  Gratian,  to  confirm  the  above  decree,  the 
object  of  which  was  to  shift  the  clergy  from  civil  to 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  or  to  the  Emperor  himself ; 
but  it  is  important  to  note  that  they  accepted  the  boon 
as  an  indulgence,  or  concession  from  the  Emperor. 
The  notion  of  "divine  right,"  now  so  confidently  and 
arrogantly  appealed  to,  was  not  then  introduced.  The 
"  exemption  "  did  not  extend  to  criminal  cases.  It  was 
from  these  small  beginnings,  concessions  made  by  tem- 
poral princes  to  ecclesiastics,  that  the  huge  ecclesiastical 
fabric  and  monstrous  Papal  hierarchy  was  ultimately 
constructed. 

The  preference  given  to  the  See  of  Rome  arose  from 
the  splendor  and  importance  of  the  city,  and  the  magnif- 
icence and  luxury,  even  at  this  early  age,  of  the  lordly 
bishop  of  that  See.  Fleury  gives  the  words  of  a  pagan 
historian  of  the  period,  who  said  that  he  was  not  at  all 
surprised  to  see  the  strifes  to  attain  to  the  Papal  See, 
when  he  considered  the  splendor  of  Rome,  where  the 
chief  bishop  is  enriched  by  offerings  from  ladies,  and 
that  they  drove  in  chariots,  clothed  splendidly,  lived 
well,  their  tables  surpassing  even  those  of  kings.  This 
author  jokingly  said  to  Damasus :  "  Make  me  bishop  of 
Rome  and  I  will  become  a  Christian."* 


*Fleury,  Eccles.  Hist.,  yol.  iv.,  p.  146.   Paris,  1724. 


276 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  MASS  AND  CELIBACY. 


The  love  of  position,  the  love  of  power,  and  the  love 
of  money  in  the  Church,  has  been  the  bane  of  the 
Church  in  all  ages.  This  we  shall  see  more  fully  further 
on,  05  the  great  apostasy  continues  to  develop.  Convo- 
cations, conventions,  councils,  synods  and  conferences, 
constituted  of  clergymen,  and  undertaking  to  legislate 
for  Jesus  Christ,  while  placing  the  masses  in  the  condi- 
tion of  passive  servitude,  have  not  only  made  a  grand 
failure  as  elevating  institutions,  but  they  have  oppressed 
and  weakened  the  Church  in  all  ages,  while  at  the  same 
time  they  have  elevated,  honored  and  enriched  the  self- 
ish and  ambitious  few. 


PRAYING  FOR  THE  DEAD. 


The  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century  (A.  D.  370)  was 
famous  on  account  of  its  orators  They  displayed  their 
talents  on  the  occasions  of  celebrating  the  memorials  of 
saints,  and  in  funeral  orations,  by  reciting  their  peculiar 
virtues.  To  give  effect  to  their  eloquence,  they  began 
to  apostrophize  the  departed.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  in 
the  first  oration,  exclaimed,  "Hear,  likewise,  thou  soul 
of  great  Constantine,  if  thou  hast  any  understanding  in 
these  things."^  The  same  orator,  in  the  second  oration, 
and  in  a  similar  manner,  addressed  his  speech  to  the 
soul  of  the  apostate  Julian,  which  he  believed  to  be  in 
hell.  These  apostrophes  were  figures  of  rhetoric:  the 
sentiments  offered  were  no  enunciation  of  doctrine,  and 
as  yet  were  different  in  character  and  purpose  from  the 
modern  custom  of  invocation  of  saints.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  a  way  was  thereby  opened  for  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  more  modern  heresy;  for  thenceforward,  by 
imperceptible  advances,  the  mystified  people  began  to 
address  their  requests  to  saints  departed  ;  but  it  was  not 
until  long  after  this  that  invocation  of  saints  was  intro- 
duced into  the  church  service  as  a  legitimatized  practice. 

Invocating  angels  became  common  in  the  province  of 
Phrygia.  Oratories  of  St.  Michael  were  erected.  This 
heresy  was  at  once  condemned  by  the  Council  of 
Laodicea,  held  about  this  time  (A.  D.  368).  The  thirty- 
fifth  canon  is  as  follows:  "It  does  not  behoove  Chris- 


*  Vol.  i.,  p.  78.    Paris,  1778,  Benedictine  EditioQ. 

(277) 


278 


PRAYING  FOR  THE  DEAD. 


tians  to  leave  the  Church  of  God  and  go  and  invoke 
angels,  and  make  assemblies,  which  things  are  forbidden. 
If,  therefore,  any  one  be  detected  idling  in  their  secret 
idolatry,  let  him  be  accursed,  because  he  has  forsaken 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  gone  to 
idolatry."  It  may  be  urged  by  the  advocates  of  saint 
worship,  that  "idolatry"  alone  is  condemned;  but  in 
passing  such  a  decree  the  Council  would  have  made 
some  reservation  for  a  legitimate  innovation,  had  such 
been  the  practice  of  the  Church  in  those  days.* 

''Praying  for  the  dead''  came  into  a  more  general 
practice  about  A.  D.  380,  as  appears  from  the  records. 
Eusebius  tells  us  that  at  the  death  of  Constantine  they 
prayed  in  behalf  of  his  soul;  "but  it  must  be  noted," 
says  CoUette,  "that  the  intent  of  these  prayers  was 
very  different  from  the  modern  custom  ;  for  the  writers 
of  this  age  testify  that,  in  the  same  prayers  were 
included  those  whom  the  modern  Church  of  Rome 
would  exclude,  namely,  those  supposed  to  be  in  hell ; 
as  also  those  who,  it  is  now  supposed,  do  not  require 
such  prayers,  but,  on  the  contrary,  are  prayed  to, 
namely,  patriarchs,  prophets,  evangelists,  apostles, 
martyrs  and  the  Virgin  Mary,  "f  Here  we  find  the 
foundation  on  which  the  modern  Papal  practice  is  based, 
which,  however,  is  inseparable  from  the  doctrine  of 
purgatory,  not  then  developed. 

From  a  passage  in  Epiphanias,  +  we  must  presume 

*  Labb  et  Coss.,  Council  Laod.,  c.  3o,  torn,  i.,  col.  1503.    Paris,  1671. 

fThe  references  are  numerous.  See  Cyril's  Catech.  xxiii.,  Mys.  tag. 
v.,  n.  ix.,  p.  328.  Paris,  1720.  Chrysost.  Horn,  xxix.,  in  Acts  ix. 
Liturg.  Oper.,  torn,  xii.,  p.  1011.  Paris,  1838.  And  admitted  by  Dr. 
Wiseman  in  his  Moorefield  Lectures,  lect.  xi.,  p.  66,  note.  London, 
1851. 

JEpiph.  Epist.  ad  Johan.  Hieros.  Hieron.,  torn,  i.,  p.  251.  Colon, 
1682. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


279 


that,  at  this  time,  some  desired  to  introduce  paintings 
in  churches,  for  he  records  the  fact  that,  on  finding  in  a 
certain  village  in  Palestine  a  painted  cloth  representing 
Christ,  he  cut  it  down.  The  authenticity  of  this  epistle 
has  been  questioned  by  Bellarmine,  but  it  has  been 
vindicated  by  the  learned  critic,  Rivet,  in  his  Crit. 
Sacer.,  edit.  1682. 

It  is  alleged  that  Siricius,  bishop  of  Rome  (386),  was 
the  first,  by  decree,  who  undertook  to  prohibit  the 
clergy  within  his  jurisdiction  from  entering  the  marriage 
relation.  The  previous  Council  of  Ancyra  (A.  D.  314) 
did  not  prohibit  the  marriage  of  the  clergy;  but  the 
tenth  canon  expressly  allowed  those  persons  who,  at 
the  time  of  being  made  deacons,  declared  their  intention 
to  marry,  to  do  so,  and  to  remain  in  the  priesthood ; 
but  those  who  did  not  declare  their  purpose,  but 
were  ordained,  professing  that  they  would  live  a  single 
life,  were  to  be  deposed  if  they  married  afterward.* 
Socrates,  the  ecclesiastical  historian  of  the  fifth  century, 
designated  this  as  a  "new  law. "f  Rather  he  should 
have  said  that  it  was  a  revival  of  an  old  pagan  custom. 
It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  the  ancient  Egyptian  priests 
were  prohibited  from  marrying.  It  was  a  Manichean 
heresy.!  It  was  not  until  A.  D.  950  that  the  decree 
was  observed  in  every  church:  for  throughout  the  prov- 
inces of  Europe  many  of  the  priesthood  were  married. 
Athanasius  (A.  D.  340),  writing  to  Bishop  Dracontius, 
told  him  "that  in  his  days  many  monks  were  parents 
of  children,  and  bishops  were  likewise  fathers.  "||  Gra- 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.  Gen.  Concl.  Ancyra,  can.  x.,  torn,  i.,  col. 
14.")6.    Paris,  1671. 

fSocrati^s'  Hist.  Ec,  lib.  i.,  c.  ii.,  Bib.  Max.  Patr.,  torn.  vii. 
tSee  Aug.  Ep.  74,  p.  848,  torn.  ii.    Paris,  1670. 
IjAthanas.  ad  Draconfcium.,  p.  739,  torn.  i.    Heidel.,  1601. 


28o 


PRAYING  FOR  THE  DEAD. 


tian  does  not  hesitate  to  testify  that  many  bishops  of 
Rome  were  the  sons  of  priests.  He  names  Popes 
Damasus,  Hosius,  Boniface.  Agapetiis,  Theodorus, 
Silverius,  Felix,  Gelasius,  as  all  being  Popes  and  sons 
of  priests,  some  even  of  bishops;  and  he  adds,  "There 
were  many  others  also  to  be  found  who  were  begotten 
of  priests  and  governed  in  the  Apostolic  See."*  Roman 
bishops,  descended  from  ecclesiastical  parents,  were 
married  during  their  clerkships:  as  were  Boniface  I., 
Felix  III.,  Gelasius  I.,  etc.  Even  so  late  as  A.  D. 
1068  we  find  that  at  a  council  held  in  Barcelona,  by  the 
Legate  Cardinal  Hugo,  it  was  unanimously  agreed  that 
the  clergy  should  not  be  married,  "as  had  hitherto  been 
permitted,  "t  The  decree  was  authoritatively  enforced 
in  1074,  under  Hildebrand,  and  renewed  by  the  twenty- 
first  canon  of  the  first  Lateran  Council,  A.  D.  11 23;  J 
and  also  by  the  sixth  and  seventh  canons  of  the  second 
Lateran  Council  (A.D.  1139).  The  latter  canon  forbade 
anyone  to  hear  mass  celebrated  by  a  married  priest,  1| 
which  canon,  by  the  way,  is  in  direct  contradiction  to 
the  fourth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Gangra  (A.  D.  325, 
or,  as  some  say,  380). 

There  were  many  unscriptural  and  superstitious  cus- 
toms practiced,  in  the  times  of  which  we  write,  under 
the  pretended  authority  of  tradition ;  and  so  great  was 
the  corruption  of  the  age,  even  at  this  early  period  of 
the  Church,  that  Cyprian  exclaimed  that  "  the  Church 
of  God  and  spouse  of  Christ  was  fallen  into  this  bad 
state,  that,  to  celebrate  the  heavenly  mysteries,  light 

*Grat.  Par.  I.,  Dist.  56,  c.  iii.,  p.  291,  torn.  i.    Lug.,  1671. 
fSee  Landon'8  Manual  of  Councils,  p.  56.    London,  1846. 
JLabb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  x.,  col.  899.    Paris,  1671. 
Illbid.,  col.  10  03. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


borrowed  discipline  even  from  darkness  itself,  and 
Christians  do  the  very  same  things  that  antichrists 
do."*  And,  in  the  succeeding  century,  Augustine 
complained  that  such  was  the  accumulation  of  ceremo- 
nial observances,  that  the  condition  of  the  Jews  under 
the  servile  yoke  of  the  law  was  more  supportable  than 
that  of  Christians  under  the  gospel,  f 

About  A.  D.  390,  a  remarkable  occurrence  took  place, 
as  recorded  by  the  historians  Socrates  and  Sozomen,^ 
with  reference  to  private  confession.  In  the  primitive 
Church  Christians  made  public  confession  of  sins  before 
the  assembled  congregation.  This  was  the  injunction 
of  the  apostles,  "Confess  your  faults  one  to  another." 
During  the  awful  persecutions  which  followed  the 
apostolic  age,  many  Christians  denied  the  faith  and 
abandoned  the  Church.  The  penitent  was,  after  a 
public  confession  and  performance  of  penance,  read- 
mitted into  the  communion  of  the  Church.  About  the 
year  250,  during  and  after  the  Decian  persecution,  the 
number  of  "penitents"  returning  to  the  faith  was  so 
great  that  the  bishops  could  not  attend  to  them  all,  and 
the  public  confession  was  as  notorious  as  it  was  scandal- 
ous. Accordingly  a  new  officer  was  created  as  "peni- 
tentiary presbyter,"  to  whom  all  who  desired  to  be 
admitted  to  public  penance  for  private  sins,  should  first 
confess  their  sins,  and  afterward,  if  not  too  scandalous 
for  public  ears,  confess  them  in  the  hearing  of  all.  This 
was  also  necessary,  as  some  public  confessions  entailed 
other  and  painful  inconveniences. 

This  was  the  first  institution  of  the  "penitentiary 

•Cyprian,  Epist.  Pomp.,  Ep.  Ixxiv.,  224.    Leipsic  edit.,  1838. 
tAug.  Epist.  ad  Jannar,  55,  sec.  35,  vol.  ill.,  p.  142.    Paris,  1700. 
JSocrates,  lib.  v.,  c.  xix.    Soz. ,  i.  7,  c.  16. 


282 


PRAYING  FOR  THE  DEAD. 


priest."  In  this  year  (A.  D.  390)  the  office  was  sup- 
pressed, and  with  it  private  confession  aboHshed.  This 
occurred  at  Constantinople  by  order  of  Nectarius, 
bishop  of  that  city,  and  the  example  was  followed  all 
over  the  East.  The  circumstance  came  about  by  rea- 
son of  a  scandalous  occurrence,  which  happened  to  a 
lady  of  distinction  after  confession,  the  crime  having 
been  committed  in  the  church  itself.  The  misbehavior 
of  one  priest  was  visited  on  all  the  priesthood,  which 
incident  set  the  whole  city  in  an  uproar ;  and,  to 
appease  the  tumult,  Nectarius  not  only  deprived  the 
offending  deacon  of  his  office,  but  also  removed  the 
"penitentiary,"  and  with  it  all  private  confessions  ;  and 
the  more  effectually  to  prevent  for  the  future  the  scan- 
dal, inseparable,  as  it  appears,  from  the  system,  he 
abolished  that  office,  and,  to  use  the  words  of  Nectarius 
above  referred  to,  ' '  Leaving  any  man  free  to  partake 
of  the  holy  mysteries  according  to  the  direction  of  his 
own  conscience,"  thus  abolishing  the  custom  of  private, 
or,  it  is  now  called,  auriculur  confession.  This,  at 
that  remote  time,  was  regarded  as  a  human  expedient, 
and  the  confession  and  penance  enjoined  were  left 
optional  with  the  people,  on  the  ground,  we  presume, 
of  the  "silence  of  the  Scriptures,"  as  some  apologists 
now  boldly  assert.  But  notice,  out  of  that  shadow  of 
apostasy  there  has  come  forth  the  real  dogma  itself, 
which  consists  in  the  fact  that  private  confession  to  a 
priest  is  now  made  compulsory  on  every  member  of  the 
Romish  Church.  The  Council  of  Carthage,  held  under 
bishop  Aurelius  in  the  year  397,  by  the  twent\--ninth 
canon  ordered  that  mass  should  be  said  in  the  time  of 
fasting.* 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  Carth.,  can.  xxiz.,  torn,  ii.,  col.  1,165. 
Paris,  ]671. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


283 


Apostasy  is  hardly  perceptible  at  first,  but  it  gathers 
momentum  as  it  proceedo,  and  descends  with  increased 
rapidity  until  the  final  crash  comes.  Once  float  away 
from  the  fixed  standard  of  New  Testament  teaching, 
and  there  is  no  telling  where  you  will  tie  up,  or  how  far 
out  you  will  float  without  pilot  or  compass.  Facilis  est 
descensus,  etc.  Either  absolute  anarchy  or  absolute 
spiritual  despotism  is  not  far  ofi",  when  men  begin  to 
talk  disrespectfully  of  the  "silence  of  the  Scriptures,*' 
and  when  they  begin  to  manufacture  "sanctified  com- 
mon sense "  out  of  that  which  is  neither  written  nor 
authorized.  Spiritual  despotism  may  be  an  escape  from 
anarchy  —  from  latitudinarianism,  or  from  rationalism. 
Where  there  is  so  much  talk  on  matters  of  "human 
expediency,"  and  a  strong  inclination  to  take  advantage 
of  the  "silence  of  the  Scriptures,"  those  in  the  per- 
formance are  verging  close  to  rationalism. 


PURGATORY  AND  PASCHAL  CANDLES. 


Between  A.  D.  230  and  A.  D.  400,  curious  and 
various  and  many  were  the  speculations  broached  in 
regard  to  the  state  of  the  dead  or  the  condition  of  souls 
in  hades  or  in  the  world  of  spirits.  Origen  (230),  a 
man  of  great  learning,  but,  withal,  a  visionary  mystic, 
seems  to  have  been  the  first  to  pave  the  way  for  the 
evolution  of  purgatory.  He  was  of  the  opinion  that  the 
faithful,  as  well  as  the  unrighteous,  would  pass  through 
a  fire  which  was  to  consume  the  world  on  the  last  day, 
after  the  resurrection,  when  all,  even  the  devil  himself, 
would  eventually  be  saved.  This  speculation,  however, 
was  condemned  by  a  general  council  of  the  Church.* 
This  theory  of  Origen,  the  Greek  scholar,  was  but  the 
prelude  of  many  other  speculations  in  regard  to  the 
existence  of  purgatory.  About  this  time,  Augustine, 
bishop  of  Hippo,  in  Africa,  though  he  condemned  Ori- 
gen's  theory,  evolved  from  the  realms  of  mysticism  one 
of  his  own  speculations.  Some  such  thing  as  a  purga- 
torial fire,  he  said,  might  be  probable,!  but  he  did  not 
treat  it  as  a  matter  of  accepted  faith  and  doctrine. 
These  mystical  speculations,  evolved  from  dreamy 
Egypt,  and  revolved  through  several  successive  centuries, 
finally  brought  to  maturity  the  modern  Romish  doctrine 

*By  the  General  Council  held  at  Constantinople,  A.  D.  553.  See 
Bals.  apud  Belveridge.  Synod,  torn,  i.,  p.  150.  Oxon,  1672.  Augastine, 
lib.  de  Haeres,  c.  xliii.,  torn,  viii.,  p.  10.  Benedictine  edition,  Paris, 
1685. 

tAugustine,  Euch.  de  Fide.  Spe.  et  Caritate,  torn,  iv.,  p.  222.  Paris, 
1685.  (284) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


285 


of  purgatory,  and  also  the  handsome  hell  of  the  Univer- 
salists. 

It  was  at  the  Council  of  Toledo  (A.  D.  400)  that  the 
bishop  of  Rome  was,  for  the  first  time,  spoken  of  simply 
by  the  title  of  "Pope."*  But,  as  we  shall  see  further 
down  the  ages,  it  was  not  until  A.  D.  1073  that  the  title 
was  assumed  exclusively  by  the  bishop  of  Rome. 

About  A.  D.  417  the  custom  of  hallowing  paschal 
candles  on  Easter  eve  was  commanded  by  Zosimus,  and 
ordered  to  be  observed  in  every  church,  f  The  word 
"Easter"  is  only  found  once  in  the  Bible — in  Acts  xii. 
4 — and  there  it  should  be  translated  Passover,  to  har- 
monize with  the  Greek  term  pascha.  Easter  is  a  word 
of  Saxon  origin,  and  imports  a  goddess  of  the  Saxons, 
or,  rather,  of  the  East,  Estera,  in  honor  of  whom  sacri- 
fices being  annually  offered  about  the  Passover  time  of 
the  year  (spring),  the  name  became  attached  by  associa- 
tion of  ideas  to  the  Christian  festival  of  the  resurrection, 
which  happened  at  the  time  of  the  Passover ;  hence  we 
say  Easter  Day,  Easter  Sunday,  but  very  improperly  ;  as 
we  by  no  means  refer  the  festival  then  kept  to  the  god- 
dess of  the  ancient  Saxons.  So  the  present  German 
word  for  Easter,  Ostern,  is  referred  to  the  same  goddess 
Estera  or  Ostera  (Calmet,  s.  v.). 

In  A.  D.  419,  when  Boniface  found  himself  seated  on 
the  Papal  throne,  he  affected  to  be  shocked  at  the  scan- 
dals witnessed  at  the  elections  of  bishops  of  Rome.  In 
order  to  prevent  cabals  and  intrigues  on  similar  occa- 
sions, to  the  scandal  of  the  Christian  religion,  from 
which  he  himself  had  not  been  free,  he  petitioned  the 
Emperor  Honorius  to  pass  a  law  with  a  view  of  restrain' 

•See  Landon's  Manual  of  Councils,  p.  578.    London,  1846. 
tPolydore  Vergil,  b.  vi.,  c.  v.,  p.  120.    London,  1551. 


286  PURGATORY  AND  PASCHAL  CANDLES. 


ing  the  ambition  and  intrigues  of  aspirants  to  the  Papacy. 
Accordingly  Honorius  made  a  decree  to  the  effect  that, 
when  two  rival  candidates  were  chosen,  neither  was  to 
hold  the  dignity,  but  the  people  and  clergy  were  to  pro- 
ceed to  a  new  election.*  This  is  the  first  instance  in 
history,  says  Bower,  in  his  "History  of  the  Popes,"  of 
princes  intermeddling  in  the  election  of  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  a  necessity  imposed  on  the  Roman  Church  on 
account  of  the  many  disorders  of  which  the  clergy  and 
people  were  guilty  in  those  elections.  The  emperors 
reserved  a  right  of  confirmation,  which  they  exercised 
for  many  years  thereafter.  A  notable  example  is  the 
case  of  Gregory  I.,  who,  when  elected,  wrote  to  the 
Emperor  entreating  him  not  to  confirm  his  appointment. 

In  the  year  431,  the  first  law  was  passed  granting 
asylum  in  churches  to  fugitives, f  or  places  for  harboring 
and  protecting  transgressors  of  the  law,  as  well  as  for 
the  persecuted  innocent  people  of  God. 

Mr.  Elliott,  in  his  HorcB  ApocalyptiCie,X  assigns  this  as 
the  date  when  the  bishop  of  Rome  distinctly  assumed 
the  "keys"  as  a  symbol  of  ecclesiastical  power.  The 
use  of  the  keys  as  symbolical  of  the  Papal  power,  is,  like 
many  similar  practices,  curiously  connected  with  pagan 
mythology.  The  key  was  a  symbol  of  two  well-known 
pagan  divinities  of  Rome.  Janus  bore  a  key,  ||  as  did 
also  Cybele.  It  was  only  in  the  second  century  before 
the  Christian  Era  that  the  worship  of  Cybele,  under  that 
name,  was  introduced  into  Rome  ;  but  the  same  goddess, 


*See  F.  Page's  Grit.  Hist.,  in  Annal.  Baroni.  ad  ann,  419. 
fCod.  Theodosius,  lib.  ix.,  tit.  45, 1,  4,  vol.  iii.    Lips.  1736.  Neaa- 
.der's  Church  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  206.    London,  1851. 
JVol.  iii.,  p.  139.    London,  1851. 

||See  Ovid's  "Fasti,"  vol.  iii.,  1,  101,  p.  346,  opera.    Leyden,  166>- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


287 


under  the  name  of  Cardea,  with  the  "  power  of  the  key," 
was  worshiped  in  Rome,  with  Janus,  many  years  before.* 
Hence,  perhaps,  the  two  keys  that  the  Pope  emblazons 
on  his  arms,  as  the  ensigns  of  his  spiritual  authority. 
The  device  was  familiar  to  the  Romans,  and  corre- 
sponded with  their  ideas  of  such  sovereignty.  As  the 
statue  of  Jupiter  is  now  worshiped  at  Rome  (or  was 
until  recently)  as  the  veritable  image  of  Peter,  so  the 
keys  of  Janus  and  Cybele  have  for  ages  been  devoutly 
believed  to  represent  the  keys  of  the  same  august 
person. 

*Torke's  "  Pantheon,"  "Cybele,"  p.  153.    London,  1806. 


THE  BEGINNING  OF  POPERY. 


The  year  A.  D.  434  is  referred  to  for  proof  that  the 
bishop  of  Rome  exercised  supreme  authority  over  the 
Church,  as  to  the  right  of  calling  councils.  With  this 
view  of  the  matter,  a  long  letter  from  Sixtus  III.  to  the 
Eastern  bishops,  as  establishing  several  of  the  Papal 
prerogatives,  is  quoted  by  Bellarmine*  and  others  to 
prove  that  councils  ought  to  be  called  by  none  except 
the  Pope,  and  by  him  alone.  Sixtus  is  represented  as 
saying:  "The  Emperor  Valentinian  has  summoned  a 
council  by  our  authority."  It  has  been  clearly  proved, 
however,  that  the  letter  is  wholly  made  up  of  passages 
borrowed  from  the  Eighth  Council  of  Toledo,  from 
Gregory  I.,  from  Felix  III.,  from  Adrian  and  from  the 
Theodosian  and  Justinian  codes;  and,  therefore,  evi- 
dently spurious,  and  the  passage  in  question  forged,  in 
order  to  introduce  a  sentence  supposed  to  have  been 
passed  by  the  Emperor  Valentinian.  A  charge  of 
immorality  has  been  invented  against  Sixtus,  who  is 
supposed  to  have  written  the  letter  on  the  occasion  of 
his  having  cleared  himself  before  a  council,  but  the  acts 
of  that  council  are  so  manifestly  fabulous  that  even 
Binius  and  Baronius  have  been  forced,  by  unquestion- 
able evidence,  to  give  them  up,  though  the  Emperor, 
whom  the  acts  suppose  to  have  assisted  at  the  council, 
is  said  to  have  referred  the  pronouncing  of  the  sentence 
to  the  Pope  himself,  "because  the  judge  of  all  ought  to 

»BeU.  de.  Concl.,  lib.  2,  c.  12. 

(288) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


289 


be  judged  by  none."  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  it 
was  in  order  to  estabhsh  this  maxim  that  the  acts  of  this 
council  were  forged,  as  well  as  those  of  the  alleged  pre- 
vious Council  of  Sinuessa  (A.  D.  303),  which  is  supposed 
to  have  condemned  Marcellinus,  and  which,  at  the 
expense  of  this  man's  reputation,  is  cited  to  exalt  the 
See  of  Rome. 

No  writers  earlier  than  Anastasius,  librarian  of  the 
Vatican,  who  flourished  in  the  ninth  century,  and  the 
historian  Platina,  who  died  in  1481,  have  treated  the 
charge  against  Sixtus  as  a  serious  fact.  This  letter,  with 
other  palpable  forgeries,  was  for  a  long  time  received 
as  genuine,  but  it  is  now  wholly  renounced.  "If  the 
Roman  system  be  of  God  [says  Collette  in  "The  Novel- 
ties of  Romanism"],  and  the  Roman  Church  founded 
upon  a  rock,  against  which  the  gates  of  hell  shall  never 
prevail,  surely  falsehood,  fraud  and  forgeries  were  not 
required  to  prop  it  up."  To  the  acts  of  the  council 
referred  to  are  added  those  of  the  judgment,  supposed 
to  have  been  given  at  Rome,  on  the  occasion  of  an 
appeal  made  to  that  See  by  one  Polychronius,  said  to 
have  been  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  to  have  appealed 
from  the  judgment  of  his  colleagues  in  the  East  to  that 
of  the  bishop  of  Rome.  This  judgment  has  also  been 
for  a  long  time  held  up  as  genuine,  to  prove  that  East- 
ern bishops  appealed  to  the  bishop  of  Rome.  Nicholas 
I.,  in  the  ninth  century,  appealed  to  these  acts  as  genu- 
ine in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  to  the  Emperor  Michael. 
But  that  they  are  shameful  forgeries  is  palpable  on  the 
face  of  them.  It  is  upon  such  a  rotten  foundation  as 
this — a  foundation  of  tradition  and  lying  assumptions — 
that  Romanism  is  built.  "Antiquity,"  indeed!  yes,  the 
antiquity  of  Egyptian  mysticism  and  Roman  paganism  1 
20 


290 


THE  BEGINNING  OF  POPERY. 


The  judgment  is  supposed  to  have  been  given  while  the 
Emperor  Yalentinian  was  the  seventh  time  consul  with 
Avienus,  that  is,  no  fewer  than  eleven  years  after  the 
death  of  Sixtus  III.  Besides,  it  is  manifest  from  the 
acts  of  the  Councils  of  Ephesus  (A.  D.  431)  and  Chalce- 
don  (A.  D.  451),  that  Juvenalis  assisted  at  both  as 
bishop  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  the  first  of  these  two  councils 
was  held  a  year  before  the  election  of  Sixtus  III.,  and 
the  latter  eleven  years  after  his  death  (Sixtus  became 
bishop  of  Rome  A.  D.  432,  and  died  A.  D.  440)  ;  so 
that  Polychronius  was  not  bishop  of  Jerusalem  in  his 
time.  Indeed,  it  may  be  questioned  whether  there  ever 
was  a  bishop  of  Jerusalem  bearing  that  name;  it  can  not 
be  found  in  any  catalogues  of  the  bishops  of  that  city 
that  have  been  handed  down  to  us.* 

These  vain  and  pompous  bishops  had  a  sweet  time  of 
it.  They  assumed  to  feed  the  flock  of  God,  but  the 
flock  was  consumed  by  them.  Men  who  love  office  and 
high  salaries  have,  in  every  age,  assumed  that  the  com- 
mon herd  of  humanity  can  not  live  and  flourish  without 
pastors — a  set  of  titled  land-sharks,  who,  instead  of 
feeding  and  sustaining  the  flock  of  God,  devour  the  flock 
of  God.  As  long  as  these  bishops  and  pastors  have 
good  livings,  and  as  long  as  the  flocks  are  safe  from 
prowling  wolves,  these  officers  are  ever  so  faithful  and 
courageous  ;  but  when  the  wolf  approaches,  breathing 
out  slaughter,  and  the  salary  is  exhausted,  behold  how 
many  abandon  their  charges  and  flee  to  the  mountains 
for  safety ! 

Leo  I.  (A.  D.  450)  seems  to  have  been  the  first  bishop 
of  Rome  who  interfered  with  the  election  of  bishops  in 
other  dioceses.    He  is  reported  to  have  interposed  in 


Rower's  History  of  the  Popes,  Tol.  ii.,  pp.  5-6.    London,  1750. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


291 


the  institution  of  Anatolius,  "by  the  favor  of  whose 
assent  he  obtained  the  bishopric  of  Constantinople";''' 
and  he  is  stated  to  have  confirmed  Maximus,  of  Antioch, 
and  Donatus,  an  African  bishop.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  other  bishops  arrogated  the  same  privilege — for 
instance,  Lucifer,  a  Sardinian  bishop,  ordained  Paulinus, 
bishop  of  Antioch;  Theophilus,  of  Alexandria,  ordained 
Chrysostom ;  Eustathius,  of  Antioch,  ordained  Evagrius, 
bishop  of  Constantinople,  etc.;  and  Acacius  and  Patro 
philus  expelled  Maximus,  and  instituted  Cyril,  bishop 
of  Jerusalem,  in  his  stead.  All  these  acts,  and  many 
more  that  might  be  cited,  were  done  without  any  refer- 
ence to  the  bishop  of  Rome.  Here  we  have  the  battle 
of  the  bishops— the  raging  battle  for  supremacy.  Is  it 
not  remarkable  that  we  read  of  no  such  functionaries, 
and  of  no  such  ungodly  stratagems,  in  the  apostolic  age ! 

We  are  still  in  the  mystical  regions  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, tracing  out  the  successive  innovations  which  cor- 
rupted the  primitive  Church,  and  which,  by  degrees,  led 
the  Church  into  the  wilderness,  where  its  identity  was 
entirely  lost  to  view.  We  are  tracing  out  "the  mystery 
of  iniquity,"  as  set  forth  by  the  apostle  Paul  in  Second 
Thessalonians,  second  chapter,  which  he  calls  "that  man 
of  sin,"  "the  son  of  perdition,"  who,  as  the  represen- 
tative of  Popery,  ' '  opposes  and  exalts  himself  above  all 
that  is  called  God,  or  that  is  worshiped ;  so  that  he  as 
God  sits  in  the  temple  of  God,  showing  himself  that  he 
is  God." 

About  A.  D.  450,  Leo,  bishop  of  Rome,  arrogantly 
assumed  an  authority  never  before  attempted  by  any  of 
his  predecessors,  declaring  that  the  supreme  authority 
over  Western  churches  rested  in  him  as  bishop  of  Rome. 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  iv.,  col.  847.    Paris,  1671. 


292 


THE  BEGINNING  OF  POPERY. 


"In  the  chair  of  Peter,"  he  said,  "dwelleth  the  e\i^r- 
living  power,  the  superabundant  authority."  The  cir- 
cumstances  attending  this  assumption  of  authority  are 
important  to  be  noted,  as  it  obtained  the  sanction  of 
the  Emperor.  Hilary,  metropolitan  bishop  of  Aries, 
assumed  the  right  of  ordaining  all  Gallican  bishops. 
Leo  was  made  jealous  because  this  authority  was  vested 
in  a  rival.  Becoming  highly  incensed,  he  brought 
false  accusations  against  Hilary  (see  his  9th  and  loth 
Epistles),  and  eventually  appealed  to  Valentinian  HI., 
at  this  time  Emperor  of  the  West,  a  weak  prince,  who 
could  not  cope  with  a  man  of  Leo's  craft,  address  and 
ambition.  Leo  represented  Hilary  as  a  disturber  of  the 
peace,  a  rebel  against  the  Apostolic  See,  and  even 
against  His  Majesty.  The  Emperor  was  induced  to 
issue  the  famous  "rescript,"  vesting  in  the  bishop  of 
Rome  an  absolute  and  unlimited  authority  over  the 
Gallican  churches  and  bishops.  This  "rescript"  was 
addressed  to  Aetius,  general  of  the  Roman  forces  in 
Gaul,  under  pretense  of  maintaining  peace  and  tran- 
quillity in  the  Church,  and  in  which  "rescript"  he 
stigmatizes  Hilary  as  a  traitor,  and  as  an  enem)'  both  to 
the  Church  and  State.  There  is  strong  presumptive 
evidence  that  this  document  was  dictated  by  Leo  him- 
self. It  is  set  out  in  full  by  Baronias  in  his  Annals 
(Ann.  445).  We  transcribe  the  following  passage  to 
illustrate  the  nature  of  the  power  now  first  usurped  by 
the  bishop  of  Rome : 

"  In  order,  therefore,  to  prevent  even  the  least  disturbance  in  the 
churches,  and  that  discipline  maj  not  thereby  be  infringed,  we  decree 
that,  hereafter  and  forever,  not  only  no  Gallic  bishops,  but  no  bishop 
of  any  other  province,  be  permitted,  in  contradiction  of  ancient  cus- 
tom, to  do  anything  without  the  authority  of  the  venerable  Pope  of 
the  Eternal  City;  but,  on  the  contrary,  to  them  and  to  all  men,  let 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


•whatsoever  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See  hath  ordained,  or  doth  or  shall 
ordain,  be  as  law  ;  so  that  any  bishop  being  summoned  to  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  the  Roman  Pontitif,  be  thereunto  ampelUd  by  the  governor 
of  the  prwine*." 

Thus  we  see  how  the  secular  arm  was  made  subser- 
vient to  ecclesiastical  usurpation,  the  very  thing  that 
superinduced  the  dark  ages,  and  out  of  which  for  the 
last  four  hundred  years  the  Church  has  been  trying  to 
extricate  itself.  Hilary,  and  with  him  other  Gallican 
bishops,  opposed  to  the  last  this  Papal  encroachment, 
and  they  would  never  acknowledge  the  authority  of  the 
bishop  of  Rome.  Notwithstanding  Hilary's  alleged 
traitorous  conduct  and  repudiation  of  one  of  the  alleged 
fundamentals  of  the  Church  of  that  age,  "  the  sum  and 
substance  of  Christianity,"  as  the  noted  Bellarmine  puts 
it,  this  same  Hilary  is  claimed  by  the  modern  Church  of 
Rome  as  a  canonized  saint,  standing  side  by  side  with 
his  opponent  and  oppressor,  Leo !  The  framer  of  this 
edict  did  not  hesitate  to  record  a  deliberate  untruth 
when  "ancient  custom  "  was  invoked  as  authority.  No 
such  authority  can  be  adduced,*  and  even  Leo  himself 
did  not,  for  a  considerable  length  of  time  after  the  time 
alluded  to,  claim  the  authority  of  ordaining  bishops  all 
over  the  Western  provinces,  for  in  his  eighty-ninth 
epistle,  addressed  to  the  bishops  of  Gaul,  he  expressly 
disclaimed  the  authority.  "We  do  not,"  he  said, 
"arrogate  to  ourselves  a  power  of  ordaining  in  your 
provinces  ;"t  and  this  would  warrant  us  in  suspecting 

*It  was  only  a  few  years  previous  to  this,  A.  D.  421,  that  the 
Emperor  Theodosius  referred  the  dispute  of  the  election  of  Perigenes 
to  the  See  of  Patrae  in  Achaia,  one  of  the  provinces  of  Illyricum,  to 
the  bishop  of  that  diocese,  after  he  liad  consulted  the  bishop  of  Con- 
stantinople.   See  Cod.  Theod.,  1,  45,  de  Episcop.,  1,  6. 

fP.  Leo,  Ep.  89,  quoted  by  Barrow.  See  "On  the  Pope's  Suprem- 
acy," p.  ,343,  Revised  Edit.    London,  1849. 


294 


THE  BEGINNING  OF  POPERY. 


that  the  edict  itself  is,  to  a  great  extent,  spurious.  Bat 
it  must  be  specially  noted,  says  Collette,  as  a  fact  that, 
while  Leo  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  the  Western 
bishops,  he  admitted  the  superior  authority  of  the 
State,  appealing,  on  all  occasions,  to  the  Emperor  as 
his  superior  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  under  whose 
authority  alone,  since  the  appearance  of  the  first  Chris- 
tian emperor,  all  the  early  general  councils  were  con- 
voked, who,  as  Eusebius  expresses  the  sentiment  of 
those  days  (referring  to  Constantine),  "  as  a  common 
bishop  appointed  by  God,  did  summon  synods  of  God's 
ministers.  "* 

Here  follow  other  innovations  upon  the  apostolic 
order  of  things.  But  up  to  this  date  we  find  no  trace 
of  the  origin  of  infant  baptism,  nor  any  trace  of  the 
substitution  of  sprinkling  for  immersion.  We  find  that 
in  460,  Leo,  bishop  of  Rome,  ordered  the  observance 
of  four  fasts,  namely.  Lent,  Whitsuntide,  the  Seventh 
and  Tenth  Months. 


*Eu8eb.  de  Vit.  Const.  1,  44,  p.  524.    Cantab,  1720. 


INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 


The  first  recorded  act  we  can  find  of  the  invocation 
of  a  saint,  is  when  the  body  of  Chrysostom  was  trans- 
ported to  Constantinople  in  470.  The  Emperor  Theo- 
dosius  knelt  down  before  it,  prayed  for  it  to  forgive 
his  parents,  who  had  persecuted  it  while  hving.  But 
this  profane  superstition  was  rebuked  by  the  so-called 
"Fathers  of  the  Church"  at  the  time  of  its  occurrence. 

Nicephorus,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History,  informs  us 
that  one  Peter  Gnapheous,  patriarch  of  Antioch  (A.  D. 
470),  was  the  first  who  introduced  invocation  of  saints 
into  the  prayers  of  the  Church,  and  ordered  that  the 
"Mother  of  God"  should  be  named  in  every  prayer. 
But  this  man  was  infected  with  the  Eutychian  heresy, 
for  which  cause  he  was  condemned  by  the  Fourth  Gen- 
eral Council.  A  superstition,  which  was  hitherto  only 
private,  became  public  ;  the  commemoration  of  the 
saints  was  changed  into  invocation ;  preachers,  instead 
of  addressing  their  discourse  to  the  living,  to  excite 
them  to  imitate  the  actions  of  their  dead,  began  now  to 
direct  their  prayers  to  the  dead  on  behalf  of  the  living. 
But,  as  yet,  the  practice  was  restricted  to  a  sect  of  the 
Greeks;  the  Latins  did  not  receive  the  doctrine  till  one 
hundred  and  twenty  years  further  down  the  stream  of 
innovation,  where  the  stream  began  to  widen  more  and 
more. 


THE  EUCHARIST. 


About  A.  D.  49  another  innovation  was  attempted, 
but,  for  the  time  being,  it  was  checked.  In  the  cele- 
bration of  the  "eucharist, "  a  custom  had  arisen  of 
soaking  or  dipping  the  bread  for  those  who  would  not 
drink  wine.  Julius,  bishop  of  Rome  in  A.  D.  340, 
condemned  this  practice,  notwithstanding  which  fact, 
the  custom  was  subsequently  reintroduced  into  the 
Roman  Church.  About  A.  D.  440  the  Manichees,  who 
held  wine  in  abhorrence,  attempted  to  introduce  the 
practice  of  taking  the  communion  under  one  species 
only,  namely,  the  bread.  (Parenthetically  we  would 
remark  that  some  of  the  Manichees  still  survive,  judg- 
ing by  the  disturbance  they  raise  in  some  of  our  con- 
gregations.) Leo  (A.  D.  450)*  and  Gelasius  (A.  D. 
492),  both  bishops  of  Rome,  condemned  this  heresy  in 
express  terms,  and  ordered  that  the  communion  should 
be  received  entire,  as  instituted  by  our  Lord,  or  not  at 
all.  The  words  of  Gelasius  are  so  precise  and  so  con- 
tradictory to  the  teaching  of  modern  Rome,  that  we 
have  only  to  quote  them  to  convict  the  Roman  Church 
of  imposing  on  believers  a  doctrine  most  emphatically 
condemned  by  a  bishop  of  their  own  Church.  His 
words  are : 

"We  find  that  some,  having  received  a  portion  of  the  holy  body 
only,  do  abstain  from  the  cup  of  the  holy  blood,  who,  doubtless 
(because  they  are  bound  by  I  know  not  what  superstition),  should 


♦Leon.  Mag.  Oper.  Lut.,  1623,  col.  108,  Sermon  iv.,  de  Quadrag. 

(296) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


297 


receive  the  wftole  sacrament,  or  be  driven  from  the  whole;  for  the  dividing  of 
one  and  the  eame  mystery  can  not  be  done  without  sacrilege."* 

As  connected  with  what  many  theologians  call  the 
eucharist,  and,  as  we  learn  from  the  New  Testament, 
improperly,  this  period  should  not  be  passed  over 
without  recording  the  deliberate  opinion  of  this  same 
Gelasius,  bishop  of  Rome,  on  what  is  now  deemed  a 
fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church  of  the 
present  day.  We  allude  to  transubstantiation  ;  that  is, 
the  alleged  conversion  of  the  substance  and  nature  of 
the  elements  of  bread  and  wine,  after  the  consecration 
by  the  priest,  into  "  t/te  very  and  real  body  and  blood''  of 
our  Savior  Jesus  Christ.  We  place  in  parallel  columns 
the  dictum  of  Gelasius  and  the  decree  of  Trent,  clearly 
showing  that  transubstantiation  was  an  invention  after 
this  date. 


GELASIDS,  A.  D.  492. 

"Certainly  the  sacrament  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  our  Lord,  which 
we  receive,  are  a  divine  thing  ;  be- 
cause by  these  we  are  made  partak- 
ers of  the  divine  nature.  Never- 
theless, the  itihitaiux  or  naivire  of 
the  bread  and  wine  cease  not  to 
exist;  and,  assuredly,  the  image 
and  similitude  of  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ  are  celebrated  in  the  ac- 
tion of  the  mysteries." 


DECREE  OF  TRENT,  A.  D.  1551. 

"By  the  consecration  of  the 
bread  and  wine,  the  whole  substance 
of  the  bread  is  converted  into  the 
substance  of  the  body  of  Christ, 
and  the  wliole  substance  of  the  wine  is 
converted  into  the  substance  of  his 
blood  ;  which  conversion  is  suit- 
ably and  properly  called  by  the 
Catholic  Church,  transubstantia- 
tion."! 


The  contradiction  between  the  opinion  of  Pope 
Gelasius  and  the  decree  of  the  Trent  Council,  which 

*Gela3.  in  Corp.  .Juris  Canon,  Decret.  Grat.  tert.  pars,  de  consecr. 
dist.,  ii.  chap.,  col.  1,168.  Ludg.,  1661.  And  torn,  i.,  col.  1,918. 
Ludg.,  1671.    (The  Latin  text  is  before  us.) 

fConcil.  Trid.  Sessio  XIIL,  Decret.  de  Sanct.  Euchar.  Sacramento, 
cap.  iv.,  De  Transubstantiatioue. 


298 


THE  EUCHARIST. 


now  molds  and  directs  the  power  and  politics  of  the 
Church  of  Rome,  is  so  manifest,  that  no  one  can  be 
surprised  to  find  a  desperate  attempt  made  to  explain 
away  the  otherwise  apparent  heresy  of  an  early  bishop 
of  Rome.  Baronius  and  Bellarmine  were  foremost  in 
their  endeavors  to  explain  the  difficulty  boldly  confront- 
ing them.  They  hit  upon  the  expedient  of  declaring 
that  some  other  person  of  the  name  of  Gelasius,  but  not 
Gelasius  the  bishop,  was  the  writer  of  the  treatise  in 
question.  The  Roman  Catholic  historian,  Dupin,  how- 
ever, has  exposed  the  hollowness  of  this  "pious fraud," 
and  proves  incontestably  that  the  work  in  question  is 
the  genuine  production  of  Pope  Gelasius,  who  was 
bishop  of  Rome  A.  D.  492,*  and  by  holding  on  to  this 
doctrine,  the  Church  of  Rome  stands  convicted  before 
the  intelligent  world  of  introducing  a  shameful  innova- 
tion into  the  creed  of  the  Apostolic  Church. 


» Fide  Dupin.  Ecc.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  250.  Dublin,  1723. 


IMAGES  AND  EXTREME  UNCTION. 


At  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century  (A.  D.  500} 
images  began  to  be  used  in  the  churclies,  but  as  histori- 
cal memorials  only  (we  recently  saw  the  image  of  Presi- 
dent Garfield  in  a  Sunday-school  room,  which  is  not  an 
uncommon  sight  in  certain  localities),  for  which  purpose 
alone  they  continued  to  be  used  for  about  one  hundred 
years  thereafter.  Even  this  use  of  images  received  from 
various  bishops  severe  reprobation.  Within  their  sev- 
eral dioceses  they  caused  them  to  be  broken  in  pieces, 
in  regular  iconoclastic  style.  This  was  the  incipient 
stage  of  image  worship.  Its  full  developrr.ent  is  yet  to 
come. 

Though  the  gift  of  miraculous  healing  ceased  with  the 
apostles,  yet,  about  A.  D.  528,  some  imaginative  here- 
tics retained  the  use  of  unction,  no  doubt  in  imitation  of 
the  practice  referred  to  by  the  apostle  James  in  his 
Epistle  (v.  14).  Bathers  on  leaving  the  bath,  and 
wrestlers  on  entering  the  arena,  were,  at  the  time  of 
which  we  write,  anointed  with  oil.  Christians,  in  imi- 
tation of  these  customs,  anointed  with  oil  those  who 
were  baptized  (immersed),  as  being  purified  and  singled 
out  to  contend  with  the  world.  This  miction,  as  yet, 
formed  no  part  of  the  "sacrament,"  which  Rome  subse- 
quently incorporated  in  her  Seven  Sacraments.  The 
Valentinian  heretics  arrogated  to  themselves  the  gift  of 
the  apostles,  and  anointed  their  sick  with  oil  on  the 
approach  of  death.    They  pretended  that  this  anointing, 

(299) 


30O 


IMAGES  AND  EXTREME  UNXTION. 


accompanied  with  prayers,  would  conduce  to  the  salva- 
tion of  the  soul,  though  not  to  the  healing  of  the  body. 
This  superstition  found  no  supporters  except  among  this 
sect  of  heretics.  Innocent  I.,  in  his  letter  to  Decentius, 
bishop  of  Eugubium,  refers  to  the  custom  of  anointing 
the  sick  with  oil,  which  was  to  be  exercised  not  merely 
by  the  priesthood,  but  by  all  the  faithful,  and  was, 
therefore,  evidently  not  considered  a  sacrament.  The 
practice  subsequently  gained  ground,  and  about  A.  D. 
523,  Felix  IV.,  bishop  of  Rome,  engrafted  it  on  other 
religious  ceremonies,  and  first  instituted  the  right  of 
extfcme  unction,  by  declaring  that  such  as  were  in 
extremis  (at  the  point  of  death)  should  be  anointed.* 
Ceremonies  were,  in  course  of  time,  superadded,  and 
ultimately,  but  long  after,  extreme  unction  was  made  to 
receive  the  quality  of  a  sacrament.  It  is  evident  that 
this  pretended  sacrament  is  derived  chiefly  from  pagan- 
ism, as  are  many  other  rites  and  dogmas  now  recognized 
and  legalized,  not  only  by  the  Papal  Church,  but  also  in 
Protestant  churches. 

In  A.  D.  529,  Benedict,  of  Nursia,  founded  the  order 
of  Benedictine  monks,  f 

In  A.  D.  535,  Agapetus  I.  ordained  processions 
before  the  festival  of  Easter.  Processions,  as  religious 
rites,  are  of  great  antiquity,  and  evidently  of  pagan 
origin.  With  the  Greeks  and  Romans  they  took  place 
chiefly  on  the  festivals  of  Diana,  Bacchus,  Ceres,  and 
other  deities ;  also  before  the  opening  of  the  games  in 
the  Circus ;  and  in  the  spring,  when  the  fields  were 
sprinkled  with  holy  water  to  increase  their  fertility. 

*Polydore  Vergil,  b.  v.,  c.  iii.,  p.  102.    London,  1551. 
tMosheim's  Ecc.  Hist.,  Cent,  vi.,  pt.  ii.,  p.  448,  vol.  i.  London, 
1825. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


The  pagan  priests  were  accustomed  to  head  them,  car- 
rying images  of  the  gods  and  goddesses  to  be  propi- 
tiated, and  either  started  from  certain  temples  or  from 
the  capital.  The  first  processions  mentioned  in  eccle- 
siastical history  are  those  set  on  foot  at  Constantinople, 
in  the  time  of  Chrysostom.  The  Arians  of  that  city, 
being  forced  to  hold  their  meetings  outside  of  the  city, 
went  thither  night  and  morning,  singing  anthems. 
Chrysostom,  to  prevent  them  from  perverting  the  Cath- 
olics, adopted  counter  processions,  in  which  the  clergy 
and  people  marched  by  night,  singing  hymns  and  carry- 
ing crosses  and  torches.  From  this  period  the  custom 
of  processions  was  introduced  into  the  Eastern  and 
Western  Churches.* 

In  A.  D.  538,  Vigilius,  bishop  of  Rome,  ordered  that 
the  priest,  standing  at  the  altar,  should  turn  his  face  to 
the  east,  which  was  an  old  pagan  custom  ;  and  from  this 
there  originated  another  custom,  that  of  placing  the  altar 
to  the  east  of  the  chapel.  Vitruvius,  an  eminent  archi- 
tect of  the  age  of  Augustus,  informs  us  that  when  the 
pagans  built  their  temples,  they  placed  their  choir  and 
principal  idols  toward  the  east.  (Even  in  this  enlight- 
ened age  some  congregations  of  professed  Christians  find 
it  difificult  to  locate  the  organ  and  the  choir.)  "Let 
those,"  he  said,  "who  sacrifice  toward  the  altars,  look 
to  the  east  of  the  heavens,  as  also  the  statue  which  is  to 
stand  in  the  temple,  *  *  *  j-qj.  jj.  jg  necessary 
that  the  altars  of  God  be  turned  to  the  east."!  The 
ancient  Romans  turned  to  the  east  when  they  sacrificed. 
The  custom,  therefore,  was  of  pagan  origin.  Mosheim, 

*Chry808t.  Or.  contr.  lud.  et  theatre;   Basil   Ep.  207,  al.  63. 
Ambrose  Ep.  40  ad  Theodos.  n.  14. 
fLib.  iv.,  c.  v..  Edit,  de  Laet.    Amst.,  1649. 


302 


IMAGES  AND  EXTREME  UNCTION. 


in  his  chapter  on  "Rites  and  Ceremonies,"  says  that 
"  nearly  all  the  people  of  the  East,  before  the  Christian 
Era,  were  accustomed  to  worship  with  their  fices  turned 
toward  the  sun- rising;  for  they  all  believed  that  God, 
whom  they  supposed  resembled  light,  or  rather  to  be 
light,  and  whom  they  limited  as  to  place,  had  his  resi 
dence  in  that  part  of  the  heavens  where  the  sun  rises. 
When  they  became  Christians  they  rejected  the  erro- 
neous belief ;  but  the  custom  which  originated  from  it, 
and  which  was  very  ancient  and  universally  prevalent, 
they  retained.  Not  to  this  hour  has  it  been  wholly  laid 
aside."*  The  ancient  idolaters  used  to  worship  the  sun, 
turning  to  the  east  (Ezek.  viii.  i6,  and  Deut.  iv.  19). 
The  Manichees  also  prayed  toward  the  east.  Leo  I., 
bishop  of  Rome  (A.  D.  443),  ordained  that,  in  order  to 
discern  Catholics  from  heretics,  the  former  should  turn 
toward  the  west  to  pray,  f  In  the  Christian  temples  at 
Antioch,  in  Syria,  the  altars  were  placed  toward  the 
west,  and  not  toward  the  east.  J 

To  Vigilius  is  also  attributed  the  institution  of  the 
feast  of  the  Purification  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  or  Candle 
Mass.  That  was  also  of  pagan  origin.  The  pagans 
were  accustomed,  in  the  beginning  of  February,  to  cele- 
brate the  feast  of  Proserpine  with  burning  of  tapers. 
To  make  the  transition  more  easy  from  paganism,  they 
instituted  on  the  same  day  a  feast,  and  burned  tapers  in 
honor  of  the  Virgin  Mary.    According  to  Picard,  the 


*Eccl.  Hist.,  cent.  ii. ,  pt.  ii.,  cap.  iv. ,  sec.  7. 

f"  Ad  occidentem  conversi  Deum  colerunt."  Binius  Concl.,  torn,  i., 
fol.  932,  Colon,  1606.  And  Cardinal  Baronius'  Annal.,  ann.  443, 
pom.  5,  torn.  \n.,  p.  556. 

JSocrat.  Eccl.  Hist.,  in  Euseb.,  lib.  v.,  c.  xxii.    London,  1709. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


institution  of  this  feast  is  attributed  to  Gelasius  I.,  in  the 
year  496  ;  and  the  procession  of  wax  lights,  to  drive  away 
evil  spirits,  to  Sergius  I.,  in  the  year  701.* 

•Ceremonies  et  Contumes  Religieuses,  vol.  i.,  pt.  ii.,  p.  163,  notes  c 
and  d.    Amsterdam,  1723. 


UNIVERSAL  BISHOP. 


Toward  the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  century  (59S), 
John,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  assumed  the  title  of 
Universal  Bishop.  Pelagius  II.,  and  after  him  his  suc- 
cessor, Gregory,  both  bishops  of  Rome,  were  shocked 
at  the  assumption  of  such  a  title  by  any  individual,  and 
denounced  the  act  in  the  strongest  terms  of  reprobation. 
Gregory,  in  his  letters  to  the  Emperor,  said:  "I  confi- 
dently assert  whoever  calls  himself  the  universal  bishop, 
is  the  forerunner  of  Antichrist."  Here  are  his  precise 
words : 

"  I,  indeed,  confidently  assert  that  whosoever  either  calls  himself,  or 
desires  to  be  called,  Universal  Priest,  that  person,  in  his  vain  elation, 
is  the  precursor  of  Antichrist,  because,  through  his  pride,  he  exalts 
himself  above  the  others."* 

So  spoke  the  bishop  of  Rome  at  that  time.  And  as 
a  question  of  historical  fact,  he  publicly  asserted  that 
none  of  his  predecessors  did  ever  assume  the  impious 
title  of  "  universal  bishop." 

Pontifex  Maxivius  was  of  pagan  origin.  Dionysius, 
of  Halicarnassus,  gives  a  description  of  the  "Supreme 
Pontiff"  of  the  ancient  Romans  in  his  "Life  of  Numa 
Pompilius, "  as  also  does  the  historian  Livy.  We  find 
coins  in  the  time  of  the  Cssars,  on  which  the  Emperor 
was  called  "Pont.  Max.,"  and  even  "Summus  Sacer- 
dos."  The  heathen  historian  Zosimus  (A.  D.  426) 
gives  the  following  account  of  the  title  before  it  was 

*Gregor.  I.,  Epist.,  lib.  v.;  Epist.  viii.,  opera.,  tom-  ii.,  p.  742. 
Edit.  Bened.,  1705. 

(304) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


assumed  by  a  Catholic  bishop.  He  says  that  "among 
the  Romans,  the  persons  who  had  the  superintendence 
of  sacred  things  were  the  pontifices,  who  are  termed 
Zephyrjei,  if  we  translate  the  Latin  word  'pontifices,' 
which  means  bridge-makers,  into  the  Greek. "  He  pro- 
ceeds : 

The  origin  of  the  appellation  was  this.  At  a  period  before  mankind 
was  acquainted  with  the  mode  of  worshiping  by  statues,  some  images 
of  the  gods  were  made  in  Thessaly.  As  there  were  not  then  any  tem- 
ples (for  the  use  of  them  was  likewise  unknown),  they  fixed  up  these 
figures  of  the  gods  on  a  bridge  over  the  river  Pevensa,  and  called  those 
who  sacrificed  to  the  god  Zephyraei — priests  of  the  bridge — from  the 
place  where  the  images  were  first  erected.  Hence  the  Romans,  deriv- 
ing it  from  the  Greeks,  called  their  own  priests  Pontifices,  and  enacted 
a  law  that  kings,  for  the  sake  of  dignity,  should  be  considered  of  the 
number.  The  first  of  the  kings  who  enjoyed  this  dignity  was  Numa 
Pompilius.  After  him  it  was  conferred  not  only  upon  the  kings,  but 
upon  Octavianus  and  his  successors  in  the  Roman  Empire.  Upon  the 
elevation  of  any  one  to  the  imperial  dignity,  the  pontifices  brought  him 
the  priestly  habit,  and  he  was  immediately  styled  Pontifex  Maximus,  or 
Chief  Priest.  All  former  emperors,  indeed,  appeared  gratified  with 
the  dedication,  and  willingly  adopted  the  title.  Even  Constantine 
himself,  when  he  was  emperor,  accepted  it,  although  he  was  seduced 
from  the  path  of  rectitude  in  regard  to  the  sacred  affairs,  and  had 
embraced  the  Christian  faith.  In  like  manner  did  all  who  succeeded 
him,  till  Valentinian  Noleus  ;  but  when  the  pontifices  brought  the 
sacred  robe  in  the  accustomed  manner  to  Gratian,  he,  considering  it  a 
garment  unlawful  for  a  Christian  to  wear,  rejected  the  offer.  When 
the  robe  was  returned  to  the  priests  who  had  brought  it,  their  chief  is 
said  to  have  made  an  observation,  "  If  the  Emperor  refuses  to  become 
pontifex,  we  shall  soon  make  one."* 

We  shall  have  more  to  say  about  the  supremacy  of 
the  Pope  of  Rome.  We  suppose  those  traditionists 
reasoned  just  as  modern  innovators  reason,  that  because 
the  Word  of  God  does  not  expressly  condemn  innova- 

♦Zosimus,  b.  iv.,  c.  36,  p.  196,    <yit.  Grace  et  Latine,  Lipsc,  1784 
— English  tnmslation. 
21 


3o6 


UNIVERSAL  BISHOP. 


tions,  or  because  of  the  silence  of  the  Scriptures,  tTiere- 
fore  they  may  be  received  and  innocently  practiced. 
The  reader  will  have  noticed  that  in  all  the  innovations 
we  have  introduced,  running  through  four  centuries,  not 
an  appeal  was  made  to  the  New  Testament  for  scriptural 
support.  Because  of  the  "silence  of  the  Scriptures," 
tradition  was  introduced  without  stint,  and  "  cunning 
craftiness "  superseded  the  law  and  authority  of  Jesus 
Christ. 

The  seventh  century  is  prolific  of  outrageous  innova- 
tions upon  the  primitive  or  apostolic  Church.  About 
the  year  600,  "saints"  (so-called)  began  to  occupy  the 
places  of  the  " dei  minores  "  of  the  pagans;  tl.at  is,  of 
the  little  household  gods  of  the  pagans.  To  these 
"saints"  churches  or  chapels  were  now  dedicated,  and 
festivals  and  sacrificing  priests  appointed,  somewhat 
typical  of  the  festivals  and  human  mediators  that  have 
stealthily  come  in  to  disturb  and  neutralize  the  work  of 
the  reformers  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Invocation  of 
saints,  which  was  hitherto  a  private  superstition,  now 
began  to  be  publicly  practiced,  but  not  yet  as  an  accepted 
church  doctrine.  About  the  same  time  Gregory  entered 
the  name  of  the  Virgin  Mary  in  the  Litanies,  with  the 
Ora  pro  nobis^ — "  pray  for  us/' 

The  modern  dogma  of  the  invocation  of  saints  is  also 
evidently  derived  directly  from  paganism.  Apuleius,  to 
whom  we  have  already  referred,  in  his  book — "/?<"  Dt0 
Socraiis" — thus  describes  the  pagan  system:  "There 
are,"  he  said,  "certain  middle  divinities,  betwixt  the 
high  heavens  and  this  lower  earth,  by  whom  our  prayers 
and  merits  are  carried  to  the  gods.  They  are  called 
demons  in  Greek  ;  they  carry  up  the  prayers  of  men  to 

'Potydore  Vergil,  b.  viii.,  c.  L,  p.  143.    London,  1551. 


REFORMATORY  MOVtMENTS. 


the  gods,  and  bring  down  the  favors  of  the  gods  to  men ; 
they  go  and  come,  to  carry  on  one  side  the  petitions, 
on  the  other  rehef ;  they  are  as  interpreters  and  salva- 
tion-carriers from  the  one  to  the  other."  Is  not  this  a 
similar  dogma  to  that  which  we  find  in  the  Trent  Cate- 
chism? Let  us  see:  "We  ask  the  saints,  because  they 
have  credit  with  God,  that  they  may  take  us  into  their 
protection,  to  the  end  that  they  may  obtain  from  God 
those  things  we  stand  in  need  of."*  Different  men  and 
trades  of  the  present  age  have  their  patron  saints,  and 
so  had  the  pagans  of  old. 

About  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century  the  doc- 
trine of  purgatory  began  to  assume  a  more  defined  form, 
though  the  theory  as  to  the  nature  of  the  punishments 
differed  from  the  Romish  teaching  of  the  present  day. 
It  came  now  to  be  supposed  that  departed  souls  expiated 
their  own  sins  (a  doctrine  not  now  admitted,  for,  in  the 
Popish  purgatory,  sins  are  supposed  to  be  forgiven)  in 
various  ways — by  baths,  ice,  hanging  in  air,  etc.  This 
was  Gregory's  theory,  f  founded  on  well-known  pagan 
fables. 

*Cat.  Concl.  Trid.,  part  iv.,  cap.  vG.,  q.  3. 

fGreg.,  lib.  iy..  Dialog.,  c.  ir.,  p.  464,  torn.  iL    Paiia,  1706. 


SACRIFICES  FOR  THE  DEAD. 


The  Eucharist,  which  hitherto  had  been  regarded  as 
simply  a  sacrament  for  tlu  living,  now  began  to  be  offered 
as  a  sacrifice  for  the  dead.  The  offerings  bestowed  in 
memory  of  the  piety  of  the  departed  were  in  the  form 
of  alms  ;*  these  now  were  called  oblations,  and  formed 
part  of  the  sacrament  itself,  and  were  offered  in  expia- 
tion of  the  sins  of  the  departed.  On  receiving  the  offer- 
ings made  by  the  people,  the  officiating  ministers 
besought  God  that  those  fruits  of  charity  might  become 
acceptable  to  him.  The  prayers  or  orisons  offered  on 
these  occasions  were  retained,  but  instead  of  being 
rehearsed  over  the  eleemosynary  gifts  of  the  faithful, 
they  were  pronounced  over  the  elements  of  bread  and 
wine,  designated  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  mists  of  superstition  grow  denser  and  denser  as 
we  come  down  the  stream  of  time,  and  as  we  dive  into 
the  Dark  Ages.  Gregory  I.  composed  the  office  of  the 
mass;  and,  according  to  Platina,  in  reducing  the  service 
to  a  uniformity  of  worship  in  the  Western  churches,  the 
universal  use  of  the  Latin  language  was  enjoined. 
Since  then  the  Latin  tongue  has  ever  continued  to  be 

*"ScultetU8  Medulla  Tlieologise  Patrum."  Amstel.,  1603,  p.  307. 
On  examination  of  Scultetus'  work,  the  reader  will  be  satisfied  that  the 
attempt  to  identify  the  Romish  mass  with  the  oblations  or  offerings  of 
the  early  Christiana  must  be  abandoned  by  the  modern  Church  of 
Rome.  Scnltetus  was  a  Professor  of  Divinity  at  the  University  of 
Heidelberg  (1598) ;  see  also  B.  Bhenan,  in  loc.  Annot.  to  Tertulliaov 
Frank,  1597,  p.  43. 

(30«) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


the  medium  through  which  the  basest  superstitions  have 
been  communicated  to  the  people,  and  a  dialect  in  which 
the  plain  will  of  God  has  been  purposely  concealed  by 
a  wily  priesthood.  All  through  the  Dark  Ages  learning 
and  literature  were  confined  to  a  few  persons  of  the 
Papal  hierarchy,  and  the  priesthood  of  Rome,  having 
hidden  away  all  scriptural  knowledge  in  a  dead  lan- 
guage, and  beyond  the  reach  of  the  masses,  mentally 
and  morally  enslaved  the  ignorant  masses ;  and  to  this 
/day  the  mummeries  of  Rome,  mystic  Babylon,  are 
repeated  thrmgh  Uve  Latin  language. 


UNCTION  AND  WAX  CANDLES. 


Gregory  likewise  introduced  unction  into  priestly 
orders,  and  enjoined  the  adoption  of  pontifical  habits. 
He  ordained  the  use  of  incense  and  the  reHcs  of  saints 
at  the  consecration  of  chapels,  spaces  for  the  reception 
of  tapers,  and  their  being  lighted  in  daytime.  He 
ordered  pictures  of  the  Virgin  Mary  to  be  carried  about 
in  processions,  and  statues  to  be  erected  in  church  chap- 
els for  religious  purposes ;  and,  according  to  Polydore 
Vergil,  first  ordered  that  neither  flesh,  milk,  butter, 
eggs,  etc.,  should  be  eaten  on  days  set  apart  for  fasting.* 

Just  think  of  it ! — even  some  of  the  Disciples  of 
Christ,  who  claim  to  be  par  excellence  the  restorers  of 
primitive  Christianity,  construct  "memorial  windows" 
in  houses  of  worship,  with  the  names  of  sinful  saints 
pictured  upon  them,  and  these  names,  or  images,  are  to 
be  remembered  and  adored  because  of  the  money  the 
donors  liave  invested  in  them !  We  have  seen  the 
images  of  presidents  and  governors  suspended  behind 
the  pulpit.  Are  these  our  patron  saints  ?  Is  this  the 
doctrine  of  the  invocation  of  saints  ?  Is  it  any  wonder 
that  some  of  our  young  clergy  have  an  itching  for  epis- 
copacy, and  that  one  of  them  recently  predicted  that 
before  ten  years  our  preachers  would  adopt  some  form 
of  episcopacy.  As  to  power,  some  already  occupy  that 
delectable  position. 

In  A.  D.  604,  Sabinian,  successor  to  Gregory,  is  said 

•B.  Ti.,  «.  iv.,  p.  119.    London,  1561. 

(310) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


311 


by  Platina  to  have  ordered  that  lamps  should  be  kept 
perpetually  burning  in  the  places  of  meeting.  This,  as 
is  generally  known,  is  still  enjoined  by  the  Papal  ritual. 
The  Egyptians,  according  to  Herodotus,  were  the  inven- 
tors of  the  ceremony.  The  pagan  Romans  afterward 
adopted  it,  the  office  of  the  vestal  virgins  being  to  keep 
these  lamps  always  lighted.  Apuleius  describes  the 
pagan  Roman  processions  as  being  attended  by  priests 
in  surplices,  the  people  in  white  linen  vestments  singing 
hymns  and  carrying  wax  candles  in  their  hands.*  This 
ceremony  is  practiced  to  this  day  in  Romish  countries. 
Lactantius  often  refers  to  the  custom  as  a  ridiculous 
superstition,  deriding  the  Romans  "  for  lighting  up  can- 
dles for  God,  as  if  he  lived  in  the  dark."t 

In  the  use  of  these  lighted  tapers  there  is  supposed  to 
be  a  hidden  mystery.  Among  the  modern  Romans,  as 
well  as  among  the  heathen,  to  whose  religions  the  prac- 
tice is  common,  it  has  reference  to  some  evil  spirits 
which  are  supposed  to  be  present.  Among  the  Tungu- 
sian,  near  the  lake  Baikal,  in  Siberia,  wax  tapers  are 
placed  before  the  gods  or  idols  of  that  country.  J  In 
the  Molucca  Islands  wax  tapers  are  used  in  the  worship 
of  Nito,  or  devil,  whom  these  islanders  adore  (Hurd's 
"  Rites  and  Ceremonies,"  p.  91,  col.  i.,  and  p.  95,  col. 
2).  "In  Ceylon,"  says  the  same  author,  "some  devo- 
tees, who  are  not  priests,  erect  chapels  for  themselves, 
but  in  each  of  them  they  are  obliged  to  have  an  image 
of  Buddha,  and  light  up  tapers  or  wax  candles  before  it, 

*Apuleiu8,  vol.  i.,  Metam.  cap.  ii.,  pp.  1,014-1,010,  and  cap.  x., 
1,010-1,051.    Leipsic,  1842. 

f Lactantius,  "Institut.,"  lib.  vii.,  cap.  ii.,  p.  289.  Cambridge, 
1685. 

JSee  "  Asiatic  .Journal,"  vol.  xvii.,  pp.  593,  696. 


313 


UNCTION  AND  WAX  CANDLES. 


ami  adorn  it  with  flowers."  Now  mark,  if  you  please, 
the  contrast  between  Romanism  and  paganism  !  The 
conversions  they  boast  of  can  only  be  a  change  of  name. 
So  far  we  have  not  found  the  organ  or  the  violin,  or  the 
trumpet,  in  the  worship  of  the  first  six  centuries;  but 
we  shall  find  the  organ  in  the  worship  before  long. 

In  A.  D.  607,  Phocas  having  obtained  the  empire  by 
the  murder  of  the  Emperor  Mauricius,  his  predecessor, 
with  his  wife  and  five  children,  made  common  cause 
with  Boniface  III.  against  Cyriacus,  bishop  of  Constan- 
tinople, who  refused  to  countenance  his  murderous  and 
traitorous  deeds.  The  compact  was,  that  Boniface 
should  recognize  Phocas  as  lawful  emperor,  and  that  the 
latter  should  recognize  the  Church  of  Rome  to  be  the 
head  of  churches,  and  the  bishop  of  that  see  as  sover- 
eign and  universal  bishop.  This  spiritual  title  was  thus 
given  and  confirmed  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  by  imperial 
edict,  and  not  by  divine  right.  It  is  under  this  title — 
"universal  bishop"  —  that  the  succeeding  bishops  of 
Rome  held  their  ecclesiastical  "primacy." 

In  the  same  year  Mohammed  appeared  in  Arabia;  so 
that  the  Eastern  and  Western  Antichrists  appeared  sim- 
ultaneously. From  this  period  we  date  the  reign  of 
Popery  in  fact,  and  properly.  Both  these  despotisms 
become  a  terrible  scourge  to  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  corrupt  and  destroy  it  beyond  description.  No 
wonder  "  the  woman  [the  Church  of  Christ]  fled  into 
the  wilderness,  where  she  has  a  place  prepared  of  God, 
that  they  should  feed  her  there  a  thousand  two  hundred 
and  threescore  days" — twelve  hundred  and  sixty  years 
(Rev.  xii.  6).  Superstition  now  spread  rapidly,  and  the 
simplicity  and  purity  of  the  Christian  faith  soon  became 
almost  extinct. 


FEASTS  OF  ALL  SAINTS. 


In  the  year  6iO,  Boniface  IV.  consummated  the  act 
of  pagan  idolatry  by  opening  the  Pantheon  at  Rome, 
and  substituting  therein  images  of  the  so-called  saints,  in 
place  of  the  pagan  deities,  consecrating  the  place  for 
that  purpose;  hence  the  "  Feasts  of  All  Saints."  At 
this  time  also  tonsure  was  introduced.  The  tonsure  was 
an  old  pagan  custom,  and  was  practiced  in  imitation  of 
the  ancient  priests  of  Isis.*  The  tonsure  was  the  visible 
inauguration  of  the  priests  of  Bacchus.  Herodotus 
mentions  this  tonsure  in  these  words : 

The  Arabians  acknowledged  no  other  gods  than  Bacchus  and  Urania 
{i.  e.,  the  queen  of  heaven),  and  they  say  that  their  hair  is  eat  in  the 
same  manner  as  Bacchus's  is  cut ;  now  they  cut  it  in  a  drcvlar  form, 
shaving  it  around  the  temples.f 

The  priests  of  Osiris,  the  Egyptian  Bacchus,  were 
always  distinguished  by  the  shaving  of  their  heads.  J 
The  distinguishing  feature  of  the  priests  of  pagan  Rome 
was  the  shaven  head,  ||  and  this  was  equally  so  in  China 
and  India.  More  than  five  hundred  years  before  the 
Christian  Era,  Gautama  Buddha,  when  instituting  the 
sect  of  Buddhism  in  India,  first  shaved  his  own  head  in 
obedience,  as  he  pretended,  to  a  divine  command,  and 

*Polyd.  Vergil  (book  iv. ,  c.  10)  thinks  this  custom  came  from  Egypt, 
where  the  priests  were  shaven  in  token  of  sorrow  for  the  death  of  their 
god  Apis. 

•fHerod.  "  Historia,"  lib.  iii.,  cap.  8,  p.  185.    Paris,  1592. 
JMacrobius,  lib.  i.,  c.  23,  p.  189,  Sanct.    Colon,  1521. 
flTertullian,  vol.  ii.,  "Carmina,"  pp.  1,105-1,106,  Opera.  Paru, 
1844.  (313) 


314 


FEASTS  OF  ALL  SAINTS. 


was  known  by  the  title  "shaved  head  "  ;  and  "  that  h« 
might  perform  the  orders  of  Vishnu,  he  formed  a  num- 
ber of  disciples  of  shaved  heads  like  himself."*  The 
priests  and  Levites  were  forbidden  to  ' '  shave  their  heads 
in  a  round"  (Ezek.  xliv.  20;  Lev.  xix.  27,  and  xx.  5). 
Modern  Papists,  not  being  under  the  Mosaic  law,  prefer 
the  pagan  custom.  The  custom  of  shaving  the  crown 
was  adopted  by  the  Donatists.  Optatus,  bishop  of 
Mela,  in  Africa  (A.  D.  370),  reproved  them  for  this, 
saying :  ' '  Show  where  it  is  commanded  you  to  shave  the 
heads  of  the  priests  ;  whereas,  on  the  contrary,  there  are 
so  many  examples  furnished  to  show  that  it  ought  not 
to  be."t  It  is  certain  that  the  custom  was  not  sanc- 
tioned, if,  indeed,  it  was  not  condemned,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fourth  century;  for  by  the  fifty-fifth  canon 
of  the  Council  of  Elvira  (at  which  nineteen  bishops  were 
present,  including  Hosius  of  Cordova,  twenty-six  priests 
assisting,  besides  deacons),  it  was  declared  that  priests 
who  had  only  a  shaven  crown  like  idolatrous  sacrificers, 
yet  did  not  sacrifice  to  idols,  after  two  years  might 
receive  communion.  J 

It  is  apparent  that  when  men  once  begin  to  drift  away 
from  the  word  of  God,  they  immediately  begin  to  take 
advantage  of  the  "silence  of  the  Bible,"  and,  on  this 
sophistical  plea,  they  lose  respect  for  the  word  of  God 
by  essaying  to  patch  up  human  expediencies,  by  sub- 
mitting human  plans,  by  trying  to  make  the  gospel 


*See  Kenuyd's  "Buddha"  in  "Ancient  Hindoo  Mythology,"  pp. 
263-264.    London,  1831. 

fOptatus,  lib.  contra  Parmenion,  Oper.  de  Schism.  Dooat.  £oi. 
Paris,  1679. 

JMosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  vii.,  part  ii.,  p.  28,  yoI.  ii.  LondoOj 
1768. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


attractive  and  catching  to  a  captious  world,  and  by 
introducing  novelties  that  "  will  do  no  harm,"  etc. 

We  have  it  in  history  that  in  the  year  A.  D.  617  invo- 
cation of  saints  generally  was  first  used  in  the  public 
liturgies  in  the  Latin  Church  under  Boniface  V.  In 
620,  this  same  Boniface  confirmed  the  infamous  law  by 
which  churches  became  places  of  refuge  to  all  who  fled 
thither  for  protection.  The  custom  has  no  doubt  the 
merit  of  being  of  very  ancient  date,  being  of  pagan 
origin,*  and  the  Jews  also  encouraged  it;  but  with  this 
difference,  that  the  Jews  extended  their  protection  to 
such  who  had  committed  crimes  through  some  unfortu- 
nate accident,  or  without  intention  of  malice;  but  the 
Romish  priests  threw  the  protection  of  the  Church  over 
notorious  criminals,  f 

In  631,  the  festival  of  the  Exaltation  of  the  Cross  was 
instituted  by  the  Emperor  Heraclius ;  which  was  also 
established  in  the  West  by  Honorius  I.,  bishop  of  Rome, 
though  Polydore  Vergil  places  the  Invention  and  Exal- 
tation of  the  Cross  in  the  year  1260,  which  is  probably 
more  correct  (P.  Vergil,  b.  vi.,  c.  vii.,  p.  122;  London, 
15514) 

*Mo8heim,  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  vii.,  part  ii.,  p.  28,  vol.  ii.  London, 
1768. 

fPicard'e  "Ceremonies  et  Contumes  Religieuses, "  p.  29,  vol.  i. 
Amsterdam,  1723. 

JSee  Baronios'  Annals,  ad.  ann.  628,  and  Beaumgarten's  "Earlant- 
erang  der  Christi  Alterthumer,"  p.  310,  quoted  in  Reid's  edition  of 
Mosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  1852,  p.  253. 


ELECTION  OF  BISHOPS  BY  EMPERORS. 


It  was  in  the  year  666  that  Vitalius,  bishop  of  Rome, 
first  ordered  divine  service  to  be  celebrated  everywhere 
in  the  Latin  tongue,*  in  which  mystic  language, 
unknown  by  the  common  people,  the  deviltry  of  Rome 
was  to  be  carried  on.  But  it  does  not  appear  that  this 
order  took  the  form  of  a  binding  decree,  since  the  Lat- 
tran  Council,  A.  D.  1215  (as  after  observed),  relaxed 
the  custom  under  peculiar  circumstances. 

Fleury  records  the  first  instance  of  a  council  of  bish- 
ops (682)  undertaking  to  absolve  the  subjects  of  a  king 
from  their  allegiance  ;  which  assumed  power  soon  passed 
into  the  hands  of  the  Pope.f 

Before  this  time  (A.  D.  685),  the  election  of  the 
bishop  of  Rome  had  been  reserved  for  the  confirmation 
of  the  Emperor;  and  this  rule  continued  in  operation 
until  the  time  of  Pelagius  II.,  A.  D.  578.  Platina,  in 
the  life  of  this  Pope,  said:  "  Nothing  was  then  done  by 
the  clergy  in  the  election  of  a  pope,  unless  the  Emperor 
approved  the  election."]:  Pelagius  was  chosen  during 
the  siege  of  Rome,  but  he  sent  Gregory,  who  afterward 
became  Pope,  to  the  Emperor  to  excuse  himself  for  hav- 
ing been  elected  without  his  confirmation.    Gregory  I. 

*Wolphius  Lect.  Memorab.  Centenar.  Numeris  Bestia  Apoc.  xiii., 
p.  149.    Frankfort,  1G71. 

fFleury's  Eccl.  Hist.,  lib.  xl.,  p.  71,  torn.  ix.  Paris,  1703.  And 
torn,  ix.,  p.  71.    Paris,  1769. 

JPlat.  in  Pelagic  II.,  p.  18.    Colon,  1568. 

(316) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


was  also  elected  by  the  Emperor's  consent.  The  elec- 
tion continued  to  be  in  this  form  until  685,  when  the 
Emperor  Constantine  first  remitted  the  right  in  favor  of 
Benedict  II.,  the  fact  being  that  the  emperors  of  the 
East  had  almost  lost  their  influence  in  the  West.  But 
when  the  Empire  was  re-established  in  the  West  under 
Charlemagne,  Adrian  I.  (A.  D.  795),  in  synod,  delivered 
over  to  the  Emperor  the  right  and  power  of  electing  the 
bishop  of  Rome  and  ordaining  to  this  See.  He,  more- 
over, decreed  that  archbishops  and  bishops  in  every 
province  should  receive  investiture  from  him ;  and  if  a 
bishop  were  not  commended  and  invested  by  the 
Emperor,  he  was  not  to  be  consecrated  by  any  other ; 
and  any  person  acting  against  this  decree  was  to  be 
subjected  to  the  ban  of  anathema.  This  is  testified  in 
the  Roman  canon  law.*  Louis,  the  son  of  Charle- 
magne, waved  his  right ;  but  Lothaire,  his  son,  resumed 
and  acted  upon  it.  The  right  was  maintained  until  the 
time  of  Adrian  III.  (885).  The  prerogative  was  not 
given  up  without  a  struggle.  The  Emperor  still  elected 
some  bishops  of  Rome  after  this.  Some,  indeed,  were 
deemed  anti-popes;  yet  Clement  II.  (A.  D.  1046)  is 
reckoned  a  true  pope,  though  elected  by  the  Emperor. 
It  was  not  really  till  A.  D.  1080,  under  Gregory  VII., 
that  the  Emperor's  right  was  wholly  superseded  by  the 
Curia  Romana,  t  as  the  judicial  powers  of  the  Pope  are 
now  designated. 

*Corp.  Jur.  Can.,  vol.  i.,  diet.  63,  cap.  22.    Paris,  1695. 
tSee  Burnet's  Vindication  of  the  Ordinations  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land,  pp.  51-99.    London,  1677. 


INTRODUCTION  OF  INSTRUMENTAL  MUSIC 


There  is  just  the  same  scriptural  authority  for  the 
use  of  the  organ  in  Christian  worship  as  there  is  for  the 
use  of  the  mass,  image  worship,  invocation  of  saints 
purgatory,  auricular  confession,  etc.,  in  Christian  woi 
ship.  The  Greeks  as  well  as  Jews  were  wont  to  us* 
instruments  as  accompaniments  in  their  sacred  songs. 
The  converts  to  Christianity  accordingly  must  have  been 
familiar  with  this  mode  of  singing ;  yet  it  is  generally 
believed  that  the  primitive  Christians  failed  to  adopt  the 
use  of  instrumental  music  in  their  religious  worship. 
The  Greek  word  (paXXuv  (psallein),  which  the  apostle 
uses  in  Eph.  v.  19,  has  been  taken  by  some  critics  to 
indicate  that  they  sang  with  such  accompaniments. 
This  same  is  supposed  by  some  to  be  intimated  by  the 
golden  harps  which  John,  in  the  Apocalypse,  put  into 
the  hands  of  the  four-and-twenty  elders.  But  if  this  be 
the  correct  inference,  it  is  strange,  indeed,  that  neither 
Ambrose  (in  Psl.  i.  Prcef  p.  740)  nor  Basil  (in  Psl.  i., 
vol.  ii.,  p.  713)  nor  Chrysostom  (Psl.  xli. ,  vol.  v.,  p. 
12\),  in  the  noble  encomiums  which  they  severally  pro- 
nounce on  music,  makes  any  mention  of  instrumental 
music.  Basil,  indeed,  expressly  condemns  it  as  minis- 
tering only  to  the  depraved  passions  of  men  (Hom.  iv. , 
vol.  i.,  p.  33),  and  must  have  been  led  to  this  condem- 
nation because  some  had  gone  astray  and  borrowed  this 
practice  from  the  heathen. 

Thus  it  is  reported  that  at  Alexandria  it  was  rhe  eus- 

(318) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


torn  to  accompany  the  singing  with  the  flute,  which 
practice  was  expressly  forbidden  by  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria in  A.  D.  190  as  too  worldly,  but  he  then  instituted 
in  its  stead  the  use  of  the  harp.  In  the  time  of  Constan- 
tinc  the  Great,  the  Ambrosian  chant  was  introduced, 
consisting  of  hymns  and  psalms  sung,  it  is  said,  in  the 
first  fo«r  keys  of  the  ancient  Greek.  The  tendency  of 
this  was  to  secularize  the  music  of  the  Church  and  to 
encourage  singing  by  a  choir. 

The  general  introduction  of  instrumental  music  can 
certainly  not  be  assigned  to  a  date  earlier  than  the  fifth 
or  sixth  centuries ;  yea,  even  Gregory  the  Great,  who, 
toward  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  added  greatly  to 
the  existing  church  music,  absolutely  prohibited  the  use 
of  instruments.  Several  centuries  later  the  introduction 
of  the  organ  in  sacred  service  gave  a  place  to  instru- 
ments as  accompaniments  for  Christian  song,  and  from 
that  time  to  this  day  they  have  been  freely  used  with 
few  exceptions.  The  first  organ  is  believed  to  have 
been  used  in  church  service  in  the  thirteenth  century. 
Organs,  however,  were  in  use  before  this  in  theaters. 
They  were  never  regarded  with  favor  in  the  Eastern 
Church,  and  were  vehemently  opposed  in  some  of  the 
Western  churches.  In  Scotland  no  organ  is  allowed  to 
this  day,  except  in  a  few  Episcopal  churches.* 

The  early  reformers,  when  they  came  out  of  Rome, 
removed  them  as  the  monuments  of  idolatry.  Luther 
called  the  organ  an  ensign  of  Baal ;  Calvin  said  that 
instrumental  music  was  not  fitter  to  be  adopted  into  the 
Christian  Church  than  the  incense  and  the  candlestick ; 
Knox  called  the  organ  a  kist  (chest)  of  whistles.  The 
Charch  of  England  revived  them,  against  a  very  strong 

*Cyc.  Bib.,  Theo.  and  Eccl.  Literature,  vol.  vi.,  p.  7o9. 


320  INTRODUCTION  OF  INSTRUMENTAL  MUSIC. 


protest,  and  the  English  dissenters  would  not  touch 
them.  * 

Nero  greatly  admired  the  water-organ  (S7<eton.,  c.  4I, 
"Reliquam  dici  partem  per  organa  hydrauiica  novi  et 
ignoti  generis  circumdixit "').  In  ecclesiastical  history 
Pope  Vitalian  I.  figures  as  the  introducer  of  the  organ, 
and  the  date  assigned  is  666.  St.  Augustine  and  Isa- 
dore  of  Seville  serve  as  authority  for  this  statement.  It 
appears,  however,  from  the  records  of  the  Spanish 
Church,  that  the  organ  was  used  there  two  centuries 
previous  to  this  date.  In  Africa  the  organ  had  been  in 
common  use  for  some  time  previous,  and  it  is  from  that 
country  probably  that  it  was  introduced  into  Spain.  In 
the  West  the  organ  was  not  common  until  the  tenth 
century.  St.  Aldhelm,  who  died  in  709,  describes  one 
with  golden  pipes  in  England;  but  as  late  as  757,  when 
Pepin  the  Short  received  from  Constantine  Coprony- 
mus  an  organ  as  a  present,  it  is  mentioned  as  a  great 
wonder.  It  was  placed  in  the  Church  of  St.  Corneille, 
at  Compiegne,  but  whether  that  instrument  was  then 
used  for  ecclesiastical  purposes  is  a  matter  of  contro- 
versy. The  time  when  the  wind  organ  took  the  place 
of  the  water-organ  is  not  ascertained ;  some  say  in  the 
seventh  century,  f  A  bishop  of  Freysingen,  Germany, 
in  the  ninth  century  sent  to  Pope  John  VIII.,  at  Rome, 
an  organ  and  singers,  as  a  mark  of  distinguished  honor. 

There  is  no  warrant  in  the  New  Testament  for  their 
use.  (a)  There  is  no  example  of  such  by  Peter,  Paul, 
James,  John,  or  the  Master  himself,  nor  by  any  others 
in  the  apostolic  age;  nor  have  we  any  in  the  first  three 
centuries  ;  nor  until  the  mystery  of  iniquity  was  strongly 

•Ibid,  p.  762. 

fMcClintock  and  Strong's  Cyclopedia,  vol.  vii.,  p.  425. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


321 


at  work,  (b)  We  have  no  command  either  to  make  or 
to  use  them.  It  is  claimed  that  t/'aUourez  in  Eph.  v.  19 
requires  playing  on  strings;  but  that  is  expressly 
declared  to  be  done  in  the  heart  (see  in  a  following  para- 
graph). (<r)  We  find  no  directions,  formal  or  incidental, 
for  their  use ;  while  we  have  line  upon  line  about  sing- 
ing— what  to  sing,  when  to  sing,  how  to  sing. 

Instruments  were  not  used  in  the  worship  of  the 
ancient  synagogue.  They  belonged  to  the  tabernacle 
and  the  temple,  especially  the  latter;  but  were  never  in 
the  congregational  assemblies  of  God's  people.  The 
trumpet  and  other  loud  instruments  were  used  in  the 
synagogue,  not  to  accompany  the  psalm,  but  in  cele- 
brating certain  feasts  (Lev.  xxv.  9;  Num.  x.  10;  Psa. 
Ixxxi.  3).  There  was  a  feast  of  trumpets  (Lev.  xxiii. 
24 ;  Num.  xxix.  l).  They  were  used  for  proclamation 
in  going  to  war,  in  moving  the  camps,  in  assembling  the 
congregation,  as  well  as  in  triumphs,  coronations,  and 
other  extraordinary  occasions  (Num.  x.  i-io;  Lev.  xxv. 
9;  I  Kings  i.  34;  Joel  ii.  i;  Jer.  vi.  I,  et  al.).  Such 
celebrations  resembled  our  day  of  independence,  but 
were  much  more  devotional,  and,  withal,  ceremonial  in 
their  meaning.  Conrad  Iken  tells  us  that  the  Sabbath- 
day  was  introduced  with  blowing  trumpets  at  the  syna- 
gogues six  times.  At  the  first  blast  they  dropped  the 
instruments  of  husbandry  and  returned  home  from  the 
field.  This  was  on  Friday  evening,  as  we  call  it.  At 
the  second  blast  they  closed  all  the  offices,  shops  and 
places  of  business.  At  the  third  blast  pots  were 
removed  from  the  fire,  and  culinary  occupation  was  sus- 
pended. The  other  three  blowings  were  to  designate 
the  line  between  common  and  sacred  time.  All  of  these 
uses,  though  connected  with  the  worship,  were  entirely 

22 


322  INTRODUCTION  OF  INSTRUMHNTAL  MUSIC 


dififerent  from  the  psalmody  in  which  they  were  used  at 
the  temple;  but  («)  no  hint  is  given  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment or  in  the  New  that  instruments  were  ever  used  in 
the  synagogue  worship.  {b)  Orthodox  Jews  do  not 
allow  the  organ  or  any  other  instrument  in  their  syna- 
gogues; only  Reformed  or  Liberal  Jews  have  introduced 
the  organ  and  many  other  innovations,  (c)  Archaeolo- 
gists (Prideaux,  Hahn,  Calmet,  Townsend,  «/.)  make 
no  mention  of  instruments  in  the  worship,  while  they 
describe  minutely  the  furniture  of  the  synagogue;  and 
Hahn  particularly  notices  the  singing  of  the  doxologies, 
such  as  Psa.  Ixxii.  l8;  Ixviii.  i;  xcvi.  6;  cxiii.  i.  Iken 
giv^es  four  doxologies  for  the  Sabbath,  but  no  organ  or 
harp  * 

A  fearful  responsibility  rests  upon  those  persons  who 
have  introduced  the  organ  or  other  instruments  into  the 
spiritual  worship  of  God.  Some  weak-minded  people, 
vain  and  thoughtless,  might  be  excused  on  the  ground 
of  ignorance  ;  but  what  a  terrible  burden  of  responsibil 
ity  must  rest  upon  editors  and  pastors  and  preachers, 
who,  knowing  that  the  use  of  the  organ  and  select  choirs 
in  the  public  worship  is  wholly  unscriptural,  and  an 
invention  borrowed  from  the  carnal  world,  nevertheless 
encourage  these  innov^ations  by  their  silent  approbation, 
and  never  lift  as  much  as  the  little  finger  of  rebuke. 
Once  we  were  a  unit;  now  we  are  divided;  who  is 
responsible — good  men  or  bad  men,  God  or  the  devil? 

'Cycl.  Bib.,  Theo.  and  £ccl.  Literature.  McClintock  and  Strong, 
voL  vL,  p.  762> 


PRIVATE  MASSES. 


About  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  century  the  prac- 
tice of  saying  private  masses  (that  is,  the  priest  commu- 
nicating alone  without  the  people  in  attendance)  was 
introduced.  This  practice  originated  in  the  lukewarmness 
of  the  people,  including  the  clergy,  in  their  attend- 
ance on  divine  service.  Formerly,  the  assembly  com- 
municated every  day  in  the  week;  but  devotion  waxing 
cold,  the  communion  was  restricted  to  Sundays  and 
feast  days,  leaving  the  priest  alone  to  officiate  and  com- 
municate on  the  other  days.  Hence  solitary  masses. 
The  Capitular  of  Theodulf,  bishop  of  Orleans  (A.  D. 
787),  expressly  forbade  private  or  solitary  masses,  as 
did  the  Council  of  Metz,  A.  D.  813,  and  the  Council 
of  Paris,  A.  D.  829.*  This  practice  seems  to  have  been 
creeping  in  as  early  as  the  previous  century;  for  it  met 
the  rebuke  of  Gregory  I.,  who  said:  "The  priest  should 
never  celebrate  mass  alone ;  for  as  the  mass  can  not  be 
celebrated  without  the  salutation  of  the  priest  and  the 
answer  of  the  people,  it  ought,  consequently,  by  no 
means  to  be  celebrated  by  a  single  individual ;  for  there 
ought  to  be  present  some  to  whom  he  may  speak,  and 
who,  iti  hke  manner,  ought  to  answer  him,  and  he  must, 
withal,  remember  that  saying  of  Christ,  '  Where  two 
or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  I  will  be 
present  with  them.'"t    The  doctors  of  Trent,  in  the 

*Fleury's  Eccl.  Hist.,  liv.,  xlvi.,  p.  144,  torn.  i.  Paris,  1704;  and 
Neander's  Church  History,  vol.  v.,  p.  188.    London,  1852. 

fGreg.  in  lib.  Capitulari,  cap.  vii.,  apud  Cassand,  Liturg.  33,  p. 
83.    Paris,  1605. 


324 


PRIVATE  MASSES. 


sixteenth  century,  however,  declared,  in  direct  contra' 
diction  to  these  earlier  decisions,  that  ' '  if  any  one  shall 
say  that  private  masses,  in  which  the  priest  alone  doth 
sacramentally  communicate,  are  unlawful,  and,  there- 
fore, ought  to  be  abrogated,  let  him  be  accursed."* 

The  roundness  of  the  host  was  now  insisted  on  by 
the  Romish  Church.  The  shape  is  taken  from  the 
Egyptians.  "The  thin  round  cake  occurs  in  all  the 
Egyptian  altars,  "f  The  form  symbolized  the  sun 
"But,  then,  what  of  it?"  say  some  of  our  plastic  and 
irrepressible  scribes;  "if  the  pagans  practice  a  good 
thing,  why  may  not  the  Roman  Catholics?"  And,  by 
parity  of  reason,  if  the  Methodists  or  Presbyterians 
practice  a  good  thing,  should  the  Disciples  of  Christ 
refuse  to  adopt  the  pleasing  expediency  because  these 
parties  have  practiced  it?  "How  reasonest  thou,  thou 
anti-progressive  ?  " 

In  A.  D.  750,  Fleury,  the  Roman  Catholic  historian, 
tells  us  that  the  earliest  instance  of  giving  absolution  to 
penitents  immediately  after  confession,  without  waiting 
till  their  penance  was  fulfilled,  occurred  at  this  time  in 
the  rule  established  by  Boniface,  t  Stephen  II.  was  the 
first  bishop  of  Rome  who  was  carried  in  procession  on 
men's  shoulders  on  the  occasion  of  his  election.  This 
took  place  in  A.  D.  752.  It  was  a  pagan  Roman 
custom.  II 

At  a  council  held  (754)  at  Constantinople,  image 

•CJoncl.  Trid.,  can.  viii.,  sess.  xxii.,  p.  1-50.    Paris,  1832. 
tSee  Wilkinson's  "Egyptians,"  vol.  v.,  p.  358.    London,  1837- 
1841. 

JFleury's  Eccl.  Hist.,  torn,  ix.,  lib.  xliii.,  p.  390.  Paris,  1703;  »nd 
torn,  ix.,  p.  360.     Paris,  1769. 

yPicard,  "Ceremonies  et  Contames  Religieuses,"  toI.  i.,  pt.  ii.f 
p.  60,  note  g.    Ajnsterdam,  1723. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


worship  was  condemned,*  which  fact  shows  that  a 
speck  of  conscience  still  flickered  here  and  there.  It 
was  this  council  which  first  enjoined,  under  anathema, 
the  invocation  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  other  saints,  f 
According  to  Fleury,  Crodegang,  bishop  of  Metz 
(763),  first  enjoined  compulsory  oral  confession ;  but 
tliis    custom  was  restricted  to  his  own  monastery. 
The  same  bishop  instituted  the  ecclesiastical  order  of 
canons.  II    Nicholas  II.,  in  1059,  at  a  council  in  Rome, 
abrogated  the  ancient  rules  of  the  canons,  and  substi- 
tuted others  in  their  place.    Hence  rose  the  distinction 
of  secular  and  regular  canons.     The  former  observed 
the  decree  of  Nicholas  II.;  the  latter  subjected  them- 
selves to  the  more  severe  regulations  of  the  bishop 
of  Chartres,  and  were  called  Regular  Canons  of  St. 
Augu-stine.  § 

Hitherto  the  payment  of  tithes  was  enjoined,  but  not 
made  compulsory ;  but  King  Pepin  (768)  now  ordered 
tithes  to  be  paid  by  all  persons  to  the  clergy.  ^ 

At  a  council  held  at  Rome  (769),  a  decree  was  passed 
that  images  should  be  honored,  and  the  Council  of  Con- 
stantinople (A.  D.  754)  was  anathematized.** 

*Labb.  et  C08S.,  Concl.  Gen.,  torn,  vi.,  col.  1,661.    Paris,  1671. 
fLabb.  Concl.,  torn,  vii.,  col.  524.    Paris,  1671. 
JFleury,  Ecc).  Hist.,  liv.,  xliii.,  pp.  425,  426,  torn.  ix.   Paris,  1703. 
IlLe  Beuf.  Memoire  sur  I'Histoire   d'Auxerre,  torn,  i.,  p.  174. 
Paris,  1743. 

^Mosheim,  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  xi.,  part  ii.,  pp.  312,  313,  yol.  ii. 
London,  1758. 

f Fleury,  Eccl.  Hist.,  liv.,  xliii.,  p.  445,  torn.  ix.    Paris,  1703;  and 
torn,  ix.,  p.  416.    Paris,  1679. 
**Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  vi.,  col.  1,721.    Paris,  1671. 


IMAGES  IN  PUBLIC  WORSHIP. 


Previous  to  this  date  {787),  much  altercation  took 
place  as  to  the  introduction  and  use  of  images  in  public 
worship.  Irene,  the  Empress  of  Constantinople,  a 
pagan  both  by  religion  and  nationality,  a  woman  of 
notoriously  bad  character,  who  poisoned  her  husband 
in  order  to  establish  her  authority,  entered  into  an 
alliance  with  Adrian,  bishop  of  Rome,  and  convoked 
the  so-called  Seventh  General  Council,  held  at  Nice. 
By  her  influence,  the  decree  sanctioning  the  use  of 
images  in  religious  worship  was  passed.*  But  this 
decree  met  with  decided  opposition  at  other  synodical 
meetings.  The  bishops  who  refused  to  submit  to  the 
decree  were  punished,  persecuted  or  excommunicated. 
It  need  scarcely  be  observed  that  the  use  of  insages  in 
religious  exercises  is  of  pagan  origin.  This  council 
invented  what  is  called  relative  worship  ;  that  is,  "that 
the  honor  rendered  to  the  images  is  transmitted  to  the 
prototype;  and  he  who  worships  the  figure,  worships 
the  substance  of  that  which  is  represented  by  it.  "f 
And  although  this  council  asserted,  with  the  usual  bold 
assumption  and  effrontery  ever  assumed  by  the  Papal 
Church,  that  this  institution  was  established  by  "the 
holy  fathers  and  the  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
which  from  one  end  of  the  world  to  the  other  had 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  vii.,  col.  899,  Nicen  II.,  aeea.  vii., 
miction  vi.  Paris,  1671;  and  Surius  Council,  torn,  iii.,  p.  150.  Col. 
Agrip.,  1567. 

t  Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  vii.,  col.  556.   PariB,  1671. 

(326) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


embraced  the  gospel,"  it  has  been  shown  in  previous 
articles  on  images,  that  the  doctrine  of  relative  worship, 
introduced  into  Christian  worship  at  this  period  by  the 
Second  Council  of  Nice,  was  the  identical  practice  the 
heathen  adopted  and  defended,  and  was  specially  con- 
demned by  the  Fathers  Arnobius  and  Origin  of  the 
third  century,  and  Ambrose  and  Augustine  of  the 
fourth  century.* 

The  modern  custom  of  consecration  of  images,  and 
lighting  tapers  before  them,  is  only  another  retrograde 
step  toward  heathenism  and  paganism,  these  being 
ancient  practices,  as  we  read  in  the  apocryphal  book  of 
Baruch  (cap.  vi.)  of  the  Babylonian  idolaters.  It  was  a 
mark  of  religious  veneration  to  kiss  images  (i  Kings 
xix.  18),  as  do  the  modern  Romanists.  Miracles,  too, 
were  attributed  to  images  by  the  pagans,  as  now  by  the 
modern  Romanists.  The  alleged  modern  examples  are 
so  numerous  that  they  need  not  here  be  repeated. 

•Arnob.,  lib.  v.,  c.  ix.  and  c.  xvii.  Leipsic  edit.,  1816;  Origca 
Cont.  Cele.,  lib.  vii.,  c.  xliy.   Paris,  1733. 


THE  REAL  PRESENCE. 


It  will  now  be  in  order  to  give  some  account  of  the 

progress  of  the  doctrine  of  the  alleged  real,  or  substan- 
tial, presence  of  our  Lord  in  the  sacred  emblems.  The 
sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  or  the  celebration  of 
the  "eucharist,"  was  regarded  as  the  most  solemn  act 
of  the  Church.  Figurative  and  mystical  language  was 
applied  to  it,  particularly  by  members  of  the  Greek 
Church ;  as,  for  instance,  when  Chrysostom  spoke  of 
the  recipients'  mouths  being  made  red  with  the  blood. 
The  elements  themselves  took  the  names  of  the  things 
they  represented:  the ^ cup  of  the  blood;  the  bread  of 
the  body  of  Christ.  Augustine,  of  the  fifth  century, 
gives  us  several  examples  of  this,  which  it  is  not 
necessary  to  reproduce  here.  While  it  is  quite  true 
that  many  of  the  early  writers  spoke  of  the  elements  as 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  in  terms  which,  when 
taken  literally  and  detached  from  their  context,  might 
be  construed  as  favoring  the  Romish  doctrine ;  yet  such 
an  interpretation  becomes  wholly  impossible  of  accept- 
ance when  we  find  these  same  Christian  writers,  in  suc- 
cession, from  the  very  earliest  periods,  speaking  of  the 
consecrated  elements  as  similitudes,  images  and  types. 

As  extravagance  of  speech  was  highest  among  the 
Greeks,  or  in  the  Eastern  Church,  so  some  individuals 
among  them,  misled  by  these  rhetorical  phrases,  began 
to  teach  the  real  substantial  presence,  but  not  as  yet 
the  transubstantiation  of  the  elements.    Such  appeared 

(32«) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


to  have  been  the  doctrine  of  Anastatius,  of  Mt.  Sinai 
(A.  D.  6S0),  and  John,  of  Damascus  (A.  D.  740),  who 
went  still  further.  He  denied  the  bread  and  wine  to  be 
the  types  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  The  coun- 
cil held  at  Constantinople  (A.  D.  754),  which  condemned 
image  worship,  checked  this  rising  heresy  in  the  East. 
It  maintained  that  "Christ  chose  no  other  shape  or 
type  under  heaven  to  represent  his  incarnation  but  the 
sacrament,  which  he  delivered  to  his  ministers  for  a 
type  and  a  most  effectual  commemoration  thereof; 
commanding  the  substance  of  bread  and  wine  to  be 
offered,"  and  this  bread  they  affirmed  to  be  "a  true 
image  of  his  natural  flesh."* 

The  Second  Council  of  Nice  (A.  D.  787),  which 
established  the  use  of  images,  condemned  the  statement 
that  the  only  true  image  of  Christ  was  in  the  bread  and 
wine,  the  type  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  They 
declared  that  Christ  did  not  say,  "Take,  eat  the 
image  of  my  body,"  adding  the  bold  assertion,  that 
"nowhere  did  either  our  Lord,  or  his  apostles,  or  the 
fathers,  call  the  unbloody  sacrifice  offered  up  through 
the  priest,  an  image,  but  they  call  it  the  body  itself, 
and  the  blood  itself"!  This  shameful  controversy  con- 
tinued on  down  through  the  dark  ages  until  finally  tran- 
substantiation  became  a  stereotyped  dogma  of  the 
Church  of  Rome. 

In  A.  D.  795,  Leo  III.  ordered  incense  to  be  used  in 
the  Latin  Church  in  her  services.  J  The  use  of  incense 
in  public  worship  was  not  only  Jewish,  but  also  a  pagan 

*ConcJ.  Nicen.  II.,  art.  vi.,  Ijiibb.  et  Coss.,  torn,  vii.,  cols.  448,  449. 
Paris,  1671;  and  Concl.  Gen.,  torn,  iii.,  p.  599.    Romae,  1612. 
fin  Bib.  Patr.,  torn,  iv.,  p.  442.    Paris,  1589. 
JPolydore  Vergil,  b.  v.,  c.  viii.,  p.  109.    London,  1551. 


330 


THE  KHAL  PRESENCE. 


custom.  All  the  representations  of  heathen  sacrifices 
on  the  ancient  monuments  have  a  boy  in  sacerdotal 
habits  attending  with  an  incense  box,  for  the  use  of  the 
ofBciating  priests;  and  the  same  we  see  in  the  present 
day  at  all  the  popish  altars. 

The  more  we  examine  the  convocations  and  councils 
of  men  who  meet  and  pass  decrees,  and  pass  resolutions, 
and  legislate  in  open  opposition  to  the  law  and  author- 
ity of  Jesus  Christ,  the  more  clearly  do  we  perceive 
how  the  churches  have  been  enslaved  and  Christians 
robbed  of  their  personal  liberties. 


A'iSUMPTION  OF  TEMPORAL  POWER. 


Before  passing  into  the  darkness  of  the  ninth  cen- 
tury, we  must  advert  to  one  ol  the  most  important  inno- 
vations in  the  Papacy  —  namely,  the  assumption  of 
temporal  power  by  the  bishop  of  Rome.  As  yet  the 
bishop  of  Rome  held  no  temporal  rule.  It  was  not 
until  past  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century  that  a  tem- 
poral was  added  to  his  spiritual  jurisdiction.  This  was 
effected  by  a  bargain  similar  to  that  struck  with  Phocas. 

Previous  to  the  assumption  of  the  spiritual  power  by 
the  bishop  of  Rome,  the  protests  of  Bishops  Pelagius 
and  Gregory  have  afforded  us  undeniable  proofs  that 
previous  to  the  seventh  century  no  single  bishop,  either 
of  the  Roman  or  Greek  Church,  assumed  a  supreme 
spiritual  power  over  the  whole  Church ;  so,  also,  we 
have  testimony  of  the  same  character  furnished  to  us  by 
.1  bishop  of  Rome,  that  previous  to  the  fifth  century  the 
assumption  of  temporal  power  by  the  bishop  of  Rome 
was  directly  repudiated  by  Pope  Gclasius.  This  Pope 
wrote,  or  is  believed  to  have  written,  a  treatise  entitled 
De  Anathematis  Vinculo,  ' '  on  the  bond  or  tie  of  the 
anathema."  It  is  one  of  four  tracts  composed  by  him 
at  different  times,  which  are  to  be  found  under  his  name 
in  all  the  orthodox  editions  of  the  councils,  such  as 
Labbeus  and  Manse's  editions,  that  of  Binius  and  others. 
It  seems  to  have  been  written  to  explain  an  expression 
pronounced  by  his  predecessors  against  one  Acacius,  to 
the  effect  that  he  never  should,  nor  ever  could,  be 

(33») 


332  ASSUMPTION  OF  TEMPORAL  POWER. 


absolved  from  an  anathema  pronounced  against  him. 
Though  this  part  (says  Collette)  is  much  confused,  that 
which  follows  is  as  plain  as  it  is  important.  Gelasius,  in 
this  tract,  lays  down  a  clear  distinction  as  then  existing 
between  the  temporal  and  the  spiritual  jurisdiction  of 
bishops  and  emperors  or  kings.  He  states  that  anciently 
the  royalty  and  priesthood  were  often  united  in  one  and 
the  same  person,  among  the  Jews  as  well  as  the  Gen- 
tiles; but  that  since  the  coming  of  Christ  these  two  dig- 
nities, and  the  different  powers  that  attend  them,  have 
been  vested  in  different  persons ;  and  from  thence  he 
concludes  that  neither  ought  to  encroach  on  the  other, 
but  that  the  temporal  power  entire  should  be  left  to 
princes ;  it  being  no  less  foreign  to  the  institution  of 
Christ  for  a  priest  to  usurp  the  functions  of  sovereignty, 
than  it  is  for  a  sovereign  to  usurp  those  of  the  priest- 
hood. 

This  is  a  very  clear  statement,  and  never  could  have 
been  made  by  a  bishop  of  Rome  had  he  held  the  modern 
notions  of  the  present  possessor  of  the  Papal  See,  who 
brazenly  declares  that  the  temporal  is  inseparable  from 
and  is  necessary  to  the  spiritual  rule.*  But  it  is  not  our 
province  to  reconcile  Romish  contradictions  and  incon- 
sistencies. We  have  seen  that  the  spiritual  supremacy 
owed  its  origin  to  a  murderer:  the  temporal  owes  its 
origin  to  an  usurper. 

Pepin,  the  son  of  Charles  Martel,  aspired  to  the 
throne  of  France,  then  occupied  by  Childeric  III.  He 
consulted  Zachary,  bishop  of  Rome,  and  desired  to 
know  if  it  were  lawful  to  depose  the  then  lawful  ruler. 

*Tiie  original  text  is  before  us  in  Latin.  Sacro.  Cone.  Coll.,  torn, 
viii.,  cols.  93-94.  Mansi  (edit.  Florent.,  1762)  ;  and  Binius  Concl., 
torn,  ii.,  par.  i.,  p.  487.    Colon,  1618. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Zachary  wanted  this  daring  soldier's  help  to  protect 
himself  from  the  Greeks  and  Lombards.  The  result 
was  an  unholy  compact  or  an  alliance  between  them. 
Childeric  was  deposed  by  Pepin,  and  the  kingdom  trans- 
ferred to  the  latter.  The  bishop  of  Rome  formally 
recognized  the  act.  Stephen,  the  second  successor  to 
Zachary,  went  to  France  again  to  solicit  Pepin's  aid 
against  the  Lombards;  and  in  754  solemnly  confirmed 
the  decision  of  his  predecessor,  absolved  Pepin  from  his 
oath  of  allegiance  to  Childeric,  and  crowned  him  king  in 
his  stead.  In  return,  by  force  of  arms,  Pepin  handed 
over  to  the  See  of  Rome  the  exarchate  of  Ravenna  and 
other  provinces.*  Thus  was  the  bishop  of  Rome  now, 
for  the  first  time,  raised  to  the  rank  of  a  temporal 
prince.  Gregory  (A.  D.  741),  the  predecessor  of  Zach- 
ary, had  already  offered  to  withdraw  his  allegiance  from 
the  Emperor  and  give  it  to  Charles  Martel,  on  condition 
that  he  would  deliver  the  city  from  the  Lombards. 
This  scheme  did  not  succeed ;  but  his  successor,  Zach- 
ary, carried  out  the  negotiations  with  Pepin,  as  above 
stated.  Charlemagne,  the  son  of  Pepin  (A.  D.  774), 
not  only  confirmed  the  grant  made  by  his  father,  but 
added  other  Italian  provinces  to  the  See  of  Rome.  In 
return  for  Charlemagne's  donation,  the  bishop  of  Rome 
gave  him  the  title  of  "The  Most  Christian  King,"  and 
by  his  help  made  Charlemagne  Emperor  of  all  the  West. 

"In  755  King  Pepin  confirmed  to  the  Holy  See,  in 
the  person  of  Stephen  II.,  the  exarchate  of  Ravenna, 
and  part  of  the  Romagna  now  wrested  from  it;  and  in 
774  Charlemagne  confirmed  his  father's  gift  and  added 
to  it  the  provinces  of  Perugia  and  Spoleto,  which  are 

•Fleury,  Hist.,  liT.,  iliii.j  An.  755,  cap.  iriii.,  pp.  382-383,  torn.  ix. 
Paxii,  1703. 


334 


ASSUMPTION  OF  TEMPORAL  POWER. 


now  sought  to  be  revolutionized  (and  have  been),  that 
so  a  title  of  a  thousand  years'  possession  (which  few,  if 
any  other,  of  European  dynasties  can  pretend  to,)  may, 
by  a  stroke  of  the  pen,  or  a  slash  of  the  sword,  be  can- 
celed or  rent."* 

The  bishop  of  Rome  (for  as  yet  he  was  not  Pope) 
having  attained  to  this  high  degree  by  fraud,  a  further 
fraud  was  next  perpetrated  by  the  appearance  of  the 
infamous  and  notorious  forgeries  known  as  the  "Decre- 
tal Epistles  "  of  the  early  popes.  These  Decretals  were 
put  forward  to  confirm  their  spiritual  and  temporal 
power.  Binius,  archbishop  of  Cologne,  who,  in  1608, 
published  a  collection  of  councils,  while  endeavoring  to 
sustain  the  genuineness  of  these  Epistles,  admitted  that 
' '  most  of  these  letters  of  the  popes  were  written  about 
the  primacy  of  Peter ;  the  dominion  of  the  Roman 
Church  ;  the  ordination  of  bishops ;  that  priests  are  not 
to  be  injured,  nor  accused,  nor  deposed;  and  about 
appeals  being  made  to  the  Apostolic  See. "  These  docu- 
ments were  first  published  by  Antgarius,  bishop  of 
Mentz,  in  France,  about  the  year  836.  Tliey  were 
never  heard  of  before.  These  forgeries,  for  nearly 
seven  hundred  years,  deceived  the  world,  and  produced 
the  desired  effect,  f  The  frauds  were  exposed  at  the 
time  of  the  Reformation,  and  are  now  admitted  even  by 
the  Romanists  to  be  forgeries.  But  the  popes  had  the 
advantage  of  seven  hundred  years,  during  which  period 

*Dr.  Wiseman's  London  Pastoral  for  1860.  See  Tablet  for  April 
21,  1860,  p.  246,  col.  iv.  The  wily  doctor  uses  the  word  "confirmed," 
whereaa  Pepin  "gave,"  not  "confirmed,"  these  provinces  to  the  bishop 
of  Rome.    Lower  down  he  calls  it  a  "gift." 

tFleury,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vol.  ix.,  liv.,  44,  p.  500,  et  seq.,  Paris.  170.".  ; 
and  torn,  ix.,  p.  56,  Paris,  1769,  where  the  proofs  of  their  being  for- 
geries are  set  out. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS, 


335 


their  temporal  and  spiritual  supremacy,  founded  on 
these  forged  documents,  was  firmly  believed  to  be 
derived  from  the  apostle  Peter  himself,  and  thus  the 
belief  became  engrafted  in  the  Roman  hierarchy.* 

We  enter  the  ninth  century.  We  have  already  traced 
the  rise  and  progress  in  the  East  of  the  alleged  substan- 
'^tial  presence  of  Christ  in  the  bread  and  wine.  It  had 
now  (A.  D.  8 1 8)  spread  to  the  West.  Paschase  Rad- 
bert  advanced  the  following  doctrine :  "That  the  body 
of  Christ  in  the  eucharist  is  the  same  body  as  that  which 
was  born  of  the  Virgin,  which  suffered  upon  the  cross, 
and  which  was  raised  from  the  grave."!  This  theory, 
hitherto  unknown  in  the  West,  was  immediately 
opposed.  In  825  Rabanus,  archbishop  of  Mentz,  in 
his  epistle  to  Heribald,  specially  condemned  this  new 
theory,  as  then  lately  introduced.    These  are  his  words : 

Lately,  indeed,  some  individuals,  not  thinking  rightly  concerning 
the  sacrament  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  have  said  "  that  very 
body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  which  was  born  from  the  Virgin  Mary,  in 
which  the  Lord  himself  suffered  upon  the  cross,  and  in  which  he  rose 
again  from  the  sepulchre,  is  the  same  as  that  which  is  received  from 
the  altar."  In  opposition  to  which  error,  as  far  as  lay  in  our  power, 
writing  to  the  Abbot  Egilus,  we  propounded  what  ought  truly  to  be 
believed  concerning  the  body  itself. 

He  then  proceeded  to  give  a  spiritual  interpretation 
deduced  from  Christ's  words  in  the  sixth  chapter  of 
John's  Gospel,  as  being  applied  to  the  Lord's  Supper. 
The  theory  then  lately  introduced  by  some  individuals, 
and  condemned  by  this  archbishop,  is  exactly  the  same 
theory  taught  by  the  Church  of  Rome.  The  Trent 
Catechism  informs  us  that  the  body  contained  in  the 

•Neander'B  Church  Hist.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  1,  ei  seq.;  and  Life  and  Times 
of  Charlemagne  ;  Religious  Tract  Society. 

fPaschus,  Radbert  de  Sacram.  Euchar.,  cap.  iii.,  p.  19.   Colon,  1551. 


336 


ASSUMPTION  OF  TEMPORAL  POWER. 


sacrament  is  identical  "with  the  true  body  of  Christ, 
the  same  body  which  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and 
sits  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father.'"*  This  teaching, 
SIS  we  have  seen,  was  only  introduced  in  the  ninth  cen- 
tury. The  doctrine  was  considered  so  offensive  and  so 
novel,  that  this  archbishop  not  only  wrote  to  the  Abbot 
Egilus,  but  also  to  Heribald,  to  whom  he  declares  that 
the  theory  was  only  then  recently  introduced.  The 
Western  Church,  however,  now  took  the  infection, 
and  it  created  some  excitement ;  so  much  so  that  the 
Emperor  Charles  was  induced  to  take  the  opinion  of 
Bertram,  a  monk  of  the  abbey  of  Corbie.  In  reply  to 
the  Emperor's  demand,  he  wrote  a  treatise  on  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ,  wherein  he  not  only  repudiated  the 
idea  advanced  by  Radbert,  word  for  word,  but  also 
declared  that  "the  bread  and  wine  are  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  figuratively.'' \ 

According  to  the  acknowledgment  of  Alexander  of 
Hales  (A.  D.  845),  who  was  styled  from  his  skill,  the 
"irrefragable  doctor"  (A.  D.  1230),  confirmation  was 
instituted  as  a  sacrament  in  the  Meldesium  (Meaux) 
Council  of  this  date.  +  This  was  only  a  provincial  coun- 
cil. Confirmation  was  admitted  by  the  Church  of  Rome 
authoritatively  as  a  sacrament  in  1547,  at  the  seventh 
session  of  the  Council  of  Trent;  and  yet  the  Word  of 
God  makes  not  the  remotest  reference  to  confirmation  as 
a  sacrament.  It  is  not  even  founded  on  tradition;  it  is 
purely  an  assumption  without  the  semblance  of  author- 
ity.   At  a  synod  in  Pavia  (A.  D.  850)  the  custom  of 

*Catech.  Concl.  Trent,  p.  221.    Donavan's  Translation,  Dublin,  1829. 
fBertram,  Presbyt.  de  Corp.  et  Sanguin.  Domin.,  pp.  180-222, 
Colon,  1551,  or  sec.  Izxxiz.,  Oxon,  1838. 

JAlei.  Ales.  op.  omn.,  vol-  iv.,  p.  109.    Venet,  1575. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


337 


priestly  unction,  especially  in  mortal  sickness,  was  sanc- 
tioned, and  was  placed  in  the  same  rank  with  the  other 
sacraments.* 

In  852  the  Capitular  of  Hincmar  (an  eminent  bishop 
of  France)  directed  holy  water  to  be  sprinkled  on  the 
people,  houses,  cattle,  and  the  food  of  men  and  beasts,  f 

The  Feast  of  the  Assumption  of  the  Virgin  Mary 
(855)  has  no  warranty  in  any  ancient  document.^  Leo 
IV.  now  firmly  established  the  festival,  and  added  the 
octave,  to  invest  it  with  greater  dignity.  || 

No  doubt  these  medieval  innovators  reasoned  as  some 
of  our  modern  innovators  reason,  that  God  "has  left  us 
to  the  exercise  of  our  own  judgment  by  not  expressing 
his!"  These  modern  speculators  say  that  we  have  a 
right  to  speak  as  the  Scriptures  speak,  but  that  the 
"silence  of  the  Scriptures"  allows  us  to  e.xpress  our 
own  judgment!  And  look  around  on  all  sides  and 
behold  the  fruits  of  this  pernicious  principle.  Once 
adopt  that  rule  of  interpretation,  and  you  are  at  once 
driven  out  to  sea  without  chart  or  compass.  Once 
depart  from  God's  revealed  will,  and  you  at  once  open 
the  door  to  every  whim  and  fancy  of  the  human  mind. 
At  the  very  point  where  you  depart  from  the  Word  of 
God,  tradition,  with  all  its  expediencies,  comes  troop- 
ing in. 

*Neander'8  Church  History,  vol.  vi.,  p.  146.    London,  1852. 

fFleury's  Eccl.  Hist.,  lib.  44,  p.  541,  Paris,  1704  ;  and  in  torn,  x., 
p.  462,  Paris,  1769. 

JThe  various  spurious  documents  cited  by  Romanists  to  prove  the 
antiquity  of  this  festival  are  ably  exposed  by  Dr.  Tyler  in  his  "Wor- 
ship of  the  Virgin  Mary,"  part  ii.,  c.  ii.    London,  1851. 

IIFleury,  Eccl.  Hist.,  lib.  xlix.,  p.  593,  tom.  x.,  Paris,  1704  ;  and 
tom.  X.,  p.  502,  Paris,  1769. 

23 


TRADITION  PLACED  ON  A  LEVEL  WITH 

DIVINE  REVELATION. 


Down  to  A.  D.  869  the  Sacred  Scriptures  were 
accepted  alone  as  authority  in  the  Church.  The  Fourth 
Council  of  Constantinople  (A.  D.  869),  by  the  first 
canon,  first  passed  a  decree  recognizing  tradition ;  but 
it  was  not  an  oral  tradition,  as  subsequently  relied  on  by 
the  Council  of  Trent,  but  tradition  preserved  in  the 
records  of  the  Church  by  the  writings  of  a  continual  suc- 
cession of  witnesses  in  the  Church,  capable,  therefore, 
of  proof;  nor  did  this  Council  place  this  tradition  on  an 
equal  footing  with  the  Scriptures,  as  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic Council  of  Trent  subsequently  did,  but  as  a  "second- 
ary oracle  "  only.  It  was  left  for  the  Council  of  Trent, 
in  1546,  to  consummate  the  corruption  by  converting 
the  written  to  an  oral  tradition,  and  placing  the  latter 
upon  an  equality  with  the  Word  of  God.  The  decree  in 
question  is  as  follows  : 

Therefore  we  profess  to  preserve  and  keep  the  rules  which  have 
been  delivered  to  the  Holy  Catholic  Apostolic  Church,  as  well  by 
the  holy  and  most  illustrious  apostles,  as  by  the  universal  as  well  as 
local  councils  of  the  orthodox,  or  even  by  any  divinely  speaking  father 
and  master  of  the  Church  ;  governing  by  these  both  our  own  life  and 
manners,  and  canonically  decreeing  that  both  the  whole  list  of  the 
priesthood,  and  also  all  who  are  counted  under  the  name  of  Christian, 
are  subjected  to  the  pains  and  condemnations,  and  on  the  other  hand, 
to  the  approbations  and  justifications,  which  have  been  set  forth  and 
defined  by  them.    To  hold  the  traditions  which  we  have  received, 

(338) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


339 


whether  by  word  or  by  epistle  of  the  saints  who  have  shone  heretofore, 
is  the  plain  admonition  of  the  great  apustle  Paul.* 

Those  traditions  which  were  preserved,  as  we  are 
told,  by  Protestants  opposing  Romanists,  in  the  records 
of  the  Church  by  the  writings  of  a  continual  succession 
of  witnesses  in  the  Church,  and-which  are  called  "oral 
tradition,"  would  now  be  called  "laws  of  expediency," 
"sanctified  common  sense, "  "the  silence  of  the  Scrip- 
tures,"  "the  deductions  of  human  reason,"  etc.  In  our 
own  day,  and  among  our  own  selves  we  have  history 
repeating  itself  Witness  now,  if  you  please,  the  tradi- 
tion legalized  and  recognized  in  our  conventions  and  in 
our  preachers'  meetings.  With  many  these  traditions 
have  become  fixed  law,  and  woe  betide  the  man  who 
daringly  plumps  himself  against  the  decrees  of  these 
conventions  and  preachers'  meetings.  He  who  is  faith- 
ful to  the  Society,  and  swears  by  the  decrees  of  the 
Society,  may  be  canonized  in  the  calendar  of  society 
saints ;  but  if  he  refuses  subjection  to  this  yoke,  he 
invokes  the  anathemas  of  the  little  popes. 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  viii.,  cols.  1,126-1,127;  Paris,  1671. 
The  Latin  of  this  canon  is  before  us,  but  for  our  purpose  it  is  not  neces- 
sary to  quote  it. 


CANONIZATION  OF  SAINTS. 


Adrian  III.,  bishop  of  Rome,  was  the  first  who 
advised  the  canonization  of  saints  (A.  D.  884) ;  but  the 
authoritative  confirmation  by  decree  was  of  later  date, 
under  Alexander  III.  (A.  D.  1160).  The  first  act  of 
canonization  is  supposed  to  have  taken  place  in  A. 
D.  933,  under  John  XV.  The  fortunate  person  was 
Uldaric,  bishop  of  Augsburg,  who  died  about  twenty 
years  before.*  Ferraris, f  however,  says  it  is  not  cer- 
tain who  was  the  first  that  celebrated  the  canonization 
of  a  saint,  and  adds  that  many  believed  that  it  was  by 
Leo  III.,  A.  D.  804.  Neander,  in  his  Church  History, J 
notes  this  last-mentioned  period  as  the  proper  date  for 
ascertaining  the  authoritative  introduction  of  invocation 
of  saints,  which  was  then  recognized  by  the  bull  of  Pope 
John  XV. 

We  have  now  come  to  the  tenth  century.  In  A.  D. 
956,  Octavian  was  made  bishop  at  the  age  of  eighteen, 
under  the  title  of  John  XII.  ||  We  note  this  as  being 
the  first  authentic  instance  of  the  adoption  of  a  new 
name  by  the  bishop  of  Rome.  It  then  became,  and  is 
now,  the  custom  of  popes  to  change  their  names  on  the 
occasion  of  their  election.    Adrian  VI.  (A.  D.  1522),  a 

*Fleury,  Eccl.  Hist.,  torn,  xii.,  p.  275. 
tPicard,  torn,  i.,  part  ii.,  p.  143.    Amsterdam,  1723. 
JNeandor,  "Church  History,"  vol.  vi.,  p.  144.    London,  1852. 
II  "Ceremonies  et  Contumes  Religieuses,"  etc.,  Picard,  torn,  i.,  part 
ii.,  p.  49,  note  h.    Amsterdam,  1723. 

(340) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Dutchman,  refused  to  follow  this  rule.  According  to 
Polydore  Vergil,  Sergius  I.  (A.  D.  701)  first  ordained 
lhat  the  bishop  of  Rome  might  change  his  name  on 
election,  after  the  example  of  Christ,  who  changed 
Simon  Barjonas  to  Peter.  Vergil  on  this  quaintly 
observes:  "The  special  prerogative  and  privilege  of  the 
bishop  of  Rome  is,  that  he  may  change  his  name  if  it 
may  seem  to  him  not  very  pleasant  to  his  ears.  If  he 
be  a  malefactor,  he  may  call  his  name  Bonifacius ;  if  he 
be  a  coward,  he  may  be  called  Leo  ;  a  carter,  Urbanus ; 
and  for  a  cruel  man,  Clemens ;  if  not  innocent,  Innocen- 
tius ;  if  ungodly,  Pius." 


BAPTIZING  BELLS.— ABSOLUTION. 


In  a.  D.  965,  John  XIII.*  baptized  the  great  bell  of 
St.  John  Lateran  in  Rome,  naming  it  after  himself; 
thence  arose  the  custom  of  baptizing  bells.  Bellarminef 
informs  us  that  in  these  baptisms  all  the  forms  in  baptiz- 
ing children  were  used — water,  oil,  salt,  and  godfathers 
and  godmothers.  The  baptized  bell  is  dedicated  to 
some  saint,  under  whom  they  hope  to  obtain  their 
demands  from  God,  and  they  teach  that  the  sound 
drives  away  devils,  etc.X  In  A.  D.  790,  by  the  Capitu- 
lar of  Charlemagne,  the  baptism  of  bells  with  holy  water 
was  prohibited.  || 

The  modern  form  of  absolution,  ''I  absolve  tftee,"  the 
alleged  essence  of  the  sacrament,  can  not  be  traced  to 
any  authentic  record  previous  to  this  date,  A.  D.  1000. 
The  ancient  form  of  absolution  used  in  the  Church  of 
Rome  was,  "Almighty  God  have  compassion  on  thee 
and  put  away  thy  sins" — a  sort  of  a  ministerial,  but  not 
a  judicial  act.  §  This  was  changed  to  the  present  form, 
"I  absolve  thee'' — a  monstrous  dogma,  which  places  the 
pardoning  power  in  the  hands  of  a  man  instead  of  in  the 
mediation  of  Jesus  Christ :  in  the  hands  of  a  depraved 

*Picard,  "Ceremonies  et  Contumes  Eeligieuses,"  torn,  i.,  part  ii., 
p.  108,  note  g. 

fBellarmine,  Disp.  De  Rome  Pont.,  lib.  iv.,  c.  xiii.  Frag,  1721. 
JIbid,  vol.  i.,  p.  xix.  Amsterdam,  1723. 

IIFleury's  Eccl.  Hist.,  torn,  i.,  p.  -520,  Paris,  1769,  and  torn,  x.,  p. 
573,  Paris,  1703.  and  Harduin  Concilia,  torn,  iv.,  p.  846,  No.  18. 
^Confitentium  Ceremoniae  Antiq.,  edit.  Colon,  Ann.,  1539. 

(342) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


343 


priest  instead  of  in  the  will  of  the  Almighty.  Thomas 
Aquinas,  who  flourished  about  the  middle  of  the  thir- 
teenth century,  points  out  the  time  of  this  remarkable 
change ;  for  he  tells  us  that  the  authoritative  form  of 
absolution  was  found  fault  with  by  a  learned  man,  his 
contemporary,  asserting  that  thirty  years  were  scarcely 
passed  since  the  supplicatory  form  only,  "Almighty 
God  give  thee  remission  and  forgiveness,"  was  used  by 
all.*  The  present  authoritative  form  was  first  estab- 
lished in  England,  in  1268,  when,  at  a  council  held  in 
London  under  Cardinal  Ottoboni,  the  Pope's  legate,  all 
confessors  were  enjoined  to  use  it.f  This  is  Rome, 
Mystic  Babylon,  the  Mother  of  Harlots,  tradition  and 
assumption,  without  a  particle  of  the  authority  of  God's 
word. 

About  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  century,  church 
buildings  were  first  consecrated  by  the  sprinkling  of  holy 
water,  in  imitation  of  the  pagan  customs  of  using  lustral 
water  for  the  same  purpose. 

According  to  Fleury,  the  "Little  Office  of  the  Vir- 
gin "  was  introduced  about  this  time,  %  and  was  afterward 
confirmed  by  Urban  II.,  in  the  Council  of  Clermont,  A. 
D.  1095.11 

About  this  time  also,  the  "  eucharist "  was  changed 
into  a  so-called  "sacrifice";  the  ordination  service  was 
then  also  changed.  Priests  who  were  hitherto  called  to 
preach  the  gospel,  were  now  ordained,  according  to  the 
form  prescribed  in  the  Roman  pontifical,  for  another 


*Aquin.,  opus  22,  de  forma,  absol.,  c.  5,  quoted  by  Bower  in  his 
"  History  of  the  Popes,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  135.    London,  17o0. 
fCollier's  Eccl.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  474.    Folio  edit. 
tEccl.  Hist.,  torn,  xiii.,  p.  105,  Paris,  1767  ;  and  p.  621,  Paris,  1726. 
IIMosheiin's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  x.,  pt.  ii.,  cap.  iv.,  sec.  iii. 


344 


BAPTIZING  BELLS. — ABSOLUTION. 


purpose,  namely,  to  sacrifice.  Here  are  the  words: 
"Receive  thou  power  to  offer  sacrifice  to  God,  and  to 
celebrate  masses  as  well  for  the  living  as  for  the  dead,  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord."  What  hideous  dogmas,  in  all 
ages,  have  been  consecrated  "  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  "  ! 
What  recklessness  and  what  impiety! 

In  A.  D.  1003,  John  XIV.  authoritatively  allowed 
the  Feast  of  All  Souls,  appointing  it  to  be  celebrated 
upon  the  morning  after  All  Saints.  This  feast  was  insti- 
tuted by  Odilon,  abbot  of  Clugny,  at  the  latter  end  of 
the  previous  century.  It  is  a  commemoration  of  the 
dead  by  all  the  people.  This  was  an  ancient  pagan  cus 
torn.  It  was  celebrated,  according  to  Plutarch,  in  his 
Life  of  Romulus,  in  the  month  of  February,  called  the 
month  of  expiation.  Modern  Romanists  have  changed 
the  time  to  November.  Polydore  Vergil*  said :  "The 
custom  of  performing  the  service  for  one's  departed 
friends  was  long  since  adopted,  as  Cicero  shows  in  the 
first  oration  against  Anthony.  Thus  actual  service  was 
done — that  is  to  say,  annual  sacrifices  were  yearly 
offered  up  in  honor  of  the  dead.  *  *  *  And  there 
is  all  the  reason  in  the  world  to  conclude  that  Odilon 
from  this  took  the  yearly  celebration  of  the  service  for 
the  dead. "  So  we  see  that  Romanism  in  this,  as  in  so 
many  other  cases,  is  only  the  readoption  of  paganism — 
a  fact  which  Romanists  can  not  refute. 


*£ook  ix.,  c.  X.,  edit.  London,  1551. 


PENANCE. 


The  Council  of  Worms,  at  this  date  (A.  D.  1022) 
first  undertook  to  legalize  the  commutation  of  penance 
for  money.  Fleury,  the  Roman  Catholic  historian, 
thus  refers  to  the  words  extracted  from  the  Decretum 
of  Burchard,  bishop  of  Worms:  "  He  that  can  not  fast 
for  one  day  on  bread  and  water,  shall  sing  fifty  psalms 
on  his  knees  in  the  church,  and  shall  feed  one  poor  man 
for  that  day,  and  for  which  period  he  shall  take  such 
nourishment  as  he  likes  except  wine,  flesh  and  grease. 
One  hundred  genuflexions  shall  be  accepted  instead  of 
the  fifty  psalms,  and  the  rich  mav  redeem  themselves 

FOR  money.  "* 

Not  the  Romish  Church  only  deals  out  salvation  and 
honor  for  money.  We  know  of  a  class  of  men  (call  them 
priests  if  you  choose)  who  profess  par  excellence  to  rep- 
resent New  Testament  teaching,  but  who  gauge  a  man's 
standing  in  church  and  in  convention  in  proportion  to 
the  amount  of  money  he  hands  over  to  the  secretaries. 
And  these  life-directorships  and  life-memberships  and 
annual-memberships  cover  a  multitude  of  sins — a  thing 
which  poor  Christians  can  not  enjoy,  because  they  have 
no  money.  Rut  if  you  have  plenty  of  money,  the 
priests  of  the  conventions  will  give  you  a  passport  to 
heaven,  provided  you  will  "down  with  the  dust." 
Other  priests  besides  Romish  priests  have  learned  from 
Solomon  that  "money  answereth  all  things,"  even  at 
the  expense  of  Christian  virtue  and  Christian  honor. 

*Fleury,  Hist.  EocL,  torn,  xii.,  p.  413,  edit.  Paris,  1769-1774,  aad 
p.  42  j,  edit.  Paris,  1722.  (345) 


REDEMPTION  OF  PENANCES. 


We  are  now  in  the  thick  of  the  dark  ages,  A.  D.  1055 
Victor  II.  was  the  first  Pope  who  authorized  what 
might  be  termed  the  redemption  of  penances.  Hitherto 
canonical  penances  were  relaxed  by  the  bishop.  It 
was  now  enacted  that  the  penitent  might  buy  off  or 
redeem  the  penance  by  "pecuniary  mulcts,"  or  fines, 
under  the  softer  expressions  of  alms  or  donations 
bestowed  on  the  Church.  Those  who  had  no  money, 
might  redeem  the  same  by  acts  of  austerity',  fastings, 
voluntary  mortifications,  etc.,  as  above  stated.  Hence, 
the  custom  of  whipping  proceeded,  and  the  subsequent 
establishment  of  an  order  of  friars  called  the  '"Batusses," 
who,  in  their  nightly  processions,  whipped  and  other- 
wise mortified  themselves.  The  priests  of  Bellona  wore 
haircloth  and  inflicted  stripes  on  their  bodies.  The 
priests  of  Baal  also  lacerated  themselves.  Polydore 
Vergil  (lib.  vii.,  c.  vi.)  tells  us  that  the  custom  was 
derived  from  the  pagan  Egyptians  and  Romans.  He 
says :  "  Those  whom  you  see  in  the  public  processions 
walk  in  order  with  their  faces  covered  and  their  should- 
ers torn,  which  they  scourge  with  whips,  as  becomes 
true  penitents,  have  copied  after  the  Romans,  who, 
when  they  celebrated  the  feast  called  Lupercale, 
marched  thus  naked  and  masked  through  the  streets 
with  whips.  And  if  we  must  go  further  to  look  for  the 
origin  of  this  verberation,  I  will  affirm  it  to  be  derived 
from  the  Egyptians,  who,  as  Herodotus  tells  us,"  etc. 
Paganism  and  Romanism  thus  go  hand  in  hand.  The 

(346) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


347 


Roman  Breviary  and  Lives  of  the  Saints  are  replete 
with  the  examples  of  the  perpetration  of  this  barbarous 
custom  of  self-flagellation.  And  yet,  in  this,  the  latter 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century,  two  hundred  million 
Roman  Catholic  subjects  are  under  its  baneful  and 
superstitious  influence ! 

At  a  council  held  in  Rome,  under  Nicholas  II.  (A.  D. 
1059),  declared  that  the  bread  and  wine  are  the 

very  body  and  blood  of  Christ;  and  that  Christ  is  sensi- 
bly felt,  broken  and  torn  by  the  teeth  of  the  faithful.* 
This  is  not  the  precise  doctrine  of  the  modern  "  Holy 
Apostolic  Church,"  nor  was  the  council  which  presented 
the  doctrine  a  general  council.  The  above  was  the 
form  of  recantation  which  Berengarius  was.  for  the 
third  time,  compelled  to  sign.  Fleury,  nevertheless, 
informs  us  that  though  the  majority  of  the  council  were 
against  Berengarius,  yet  some  of  the  members  con- 
tended that  the  terms  of  Scripture  were  to  be  taken 
figuratively.!  At  the  same  council,  under  Nicholas  II., 
it  was  declared  that  if  any  one  should  be  elected  bishop 
of  Rome  without  the  unanimous  and  canonical  consent 
of  the  cardinals,  and  of  the  other  clergy  and  laity,  he 
should  not  be  regarded  as  a  Pope,  but  as  an  intruder. J 
Polydore  Vergil|l  says  that  the  authority  to  choose  the 
bishop  of  Rome  belonged  first  to  the  Emperor  of  Con- 
stantinople and  the  deputy  of  Italy,  till,  about  A.  D. 
685,  the  Emperor  Constantine  Pogonatus  empowered 
the  cardinals  and  the  people  of  Rome  to  elect  him.  It 

*Cor.  Juris.  Can.,  torn,  i.,  p.  2,104,  part  iii.,  dist.  ii.,  c.  xlii.  Paris, 
1612. 

tEccl.  Hist.,  torn,  xiii.,  p.  289.  Paris,  ]  726;  and  pp.  367,  368.  Paris, 
1769. 

JLabb.  et  Goes.  Concl.,  torn,  ii.,  col.  1,099.    Paris,  1671. 
t|B.  iv.,  c.  vii.,  p.  xcii.    London,  1551. 


.348 


REDEMPTION  OF  PENANCFS. 


is  quite  certain  that  up  to  trie  time  of  Leo  VIII.,  A.  D. 
965,  the  election  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  was  vested  in 
the  clergy  and  people.*  It  is  now  vested  in  the  cardi- 
nal, alone. 

Purgatory  was  now  (A.  D.  1070)  being  industriously 
advocated  by  the  priests ;  but  prayers  to  deliver  soul? 
out  of  purgatory  were  first  appointed  by  Odilon,  abbot 
of  Clugny,  about  the  latter  end  of  the  previous  century, 
by  instituting  a  festival  for  that  purpose,  f  Up  to  this 
date  (A.  D.  1073)  the  title  of  "Pope,"  or  "Papa," 
father,  was  common  to  all  bishops.  Gregory  VII.,  in 
a  council  at  Rome,  decreed  that  there  should  be  but 
one  Pope  in  the  world,  and  that  was  to  be  himself 
The  title  of  Pope  was  from  thenceforth  assumed  by 
the  bishop  of  Rome  exclusively  among  the  Western 
bishops,  though  the  Eastern  bishops  still  continued  to 
retain  the  title.  From  this  date,  however,  the  bishops 
of  Rome  only  were  properly  called  "  Popes." 

*Platina,  in  Vit.,  Leo  VIII.,  p.  154.    Colonise,  1568. 
fThis  was  in  A.  D.  998.    See  Mosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  x.,  pt. 
ii.,  c.  iv.,  8.  ii. 


COMPULSORY  CELIBACY. 


The  compulsory  celibacy  of  the  clergy  was  now  (A. 
D.  1074)  enforced  by  this  same  Pope.  The  marriage 
of  priests  was  not  altogether  forbidden  till  the  time  of 
Gregory  VIIL*  He  deprived  the  clergy  of  their  lawful 
wives,  compelled  them  to  take  a  vow  of  continency, 
and  excommunicated  the  refractory.  He  held  a  coun- 
cil at  Rome  (A.  D.  1074),  on  which  occasion  it  was 
declared  that  married  priests  should  not  be  permitted  to 
celebrate  mass,  or  to  discharge  any  of  the  superior 
offices  of  the  altar,  f  At  the  Council  of  Mayence,  held 
the  following  year  (A.  D.  1075),  the  decree  of  Gregory 
was  published,  which  enjoined  the  archbishop,  under 
pain  of  deposition,  to  oblige  the  prelates  and  other 
clergy  of  the  province  to  give  up  either  their  wives  or 
their  offices.  The  clergy  present  would  not  submit  to 
this  decree,  and  opposed  the  archbishop,  who,  fearing 
for  his  life,  gave  up  the  attempt  and  left  the  enforcement 
of  the  decree  to  Gregory  himself  I 

The  first  (so-called)  General  Council  of  the  Roman 
Church  which  authoritatively  enjoined  the  celibacy  of 
the  clergy  was  the  first  Lateran  Council  (A.  D.  1123), 
held  under  Calixtus  n.|| 

*Pol.  Vergil,  De  Rer.  Invent.,  lib.  v.,  c.  iv.,  p.  45.    London,  1551. 

fLabb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  x.,  col.  313.    Paris,  1671. 

JLabb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  x.,  col.  345.    Paris,  1671. 

||Ibi(I,  torn.  X.,  col.  891,  can.  iii.  The  Provincial  Council  of  Augs- 
burg (Augustanum),  A.  D.  952,  forbade  the  clergy,  including  bishops 
and  sub-deacons,  to  marry,  or  to  retain  females  in  their  houses.  Ibid, 
torn,  ix.,  col.  635.    Paris,  1671. 

(349) 


350 


COMPULSORY  CELIBACY 


On  the  subject  of  priestly  celibacy,  the  opinion  of 
yEneas  Sylvius,  who  afterward  (A.  D.  1458)  became 
Pope,  under  the  name  of  Pius  II.,  is  noteworthy.  "  Per- 
haps [he  said]  it  were  not  the  worse  that  many  priests 
were  married,  for  by  that  means  many  mig'.it  be  saved 
in  married  priesthood  which  now  in  celibate  priesthood 
are  damned."*  Our  readers  will  not  be  surprised  to 
know  that  this  work  long  since  was  placed  in  the 
index  of  prohibited  books,  f  which  means  books  that 
dare  not  be  read.  This  same  ^neas  Sylvius  said  that, 
"As  marriage,  for  weighty  reasons,  was  taken  from 
the  priests,  so,  upon  more  weighty  considerations,  it 
appears  that  it  ought  to  be  restored. "J  "Take  away," 
said  St.  Bernard,  "from  the  Church  {i.e.,  the  priesthood) 
honorable  matrimony,  and  do  you  not  fill  it  with 
keepers  of  concubines?"  etc.||  Polydore  Vergil§  cited 
the  last  quotation  from  ^neas  Sylvius,  in  his  book, 
*'De  Inventionibus  Rerum,''  and  he  proved  that  the  mar- 
riage of  priests  was  not  contrary  to  the  law  of  God,  that 
the  custom  continued  for  a  long  period  in  the  Church, 
and  added:  "Furthermore,  whilst  the  priests  did  beget 
lawful  sons,  the  Church  flourished  with  a  happy 
offspring  of  men ;  then  your  popes  were  most  holy, 

*^'Enea8  Sylvius,  "  Commentarii  de  gestis  Basiliensis  Concilii,"  lib- 
ii.,  ojjera.    Basil,  1571. 
fSee  Index,  lib.  prohib.    Madrid,  1667,  p.  30. 
JPlatin.  in  Vit.  Pii.  II.,  p.  328.    Colon,  1611. 

||Bened.,  Serm.  Ixvi.,  in  Cantica,  post.  imit.  vol.  ii.,  p.  i.,  p.  555. 
Paris,  1839.  N.  B. — This  sermon  is  put  among  the  "  opera  dabia": 
it  is  quoted  as  a  grave  assertion  proved  by  results  to  be  true.  We  have 
the  Latin  text  before  us. 

J  Published  in  1497,  and  subsequently  in  1528.  Parisiis  ex  officina, 
Boberti  Stephani. 


REFORMATOKY  MOVKMENTS. 


your  bishops  most  innocent,  and  your  priests  and  dea- 
cons most  honest  and  chaste"  (De  Invent.  Rerum,  Hb. 
v.,  c.  iv.,  pp.  86,  87,  Ibid,  c  ix. ,  edit,  as  above).  He 
gave,  in  the  same  place,  also,  the  reverse  of  the  picture: 
"This  I  will  affirm,  that  this  enforced  chastity  is  so 
far  from  surpassing  conjugal  chastity,  that  even  the 
guilt  of  no  crime  ever  brought  greater  disgrace  to  the 
holy  order,  greater  danger  to  religion,  or  greater  grief 
to  all  men,  than  the  stain  of  the  clergy's  lust.  Where- 
fore, it  would,  perhaps,  be  the  interest  as  well  of  Chris- 
tianity as  of  the  holy  order,  that  at  least  the  right  of 
public  marriage  were  restored  to  the  clergy,  which  they 
might  rather  chastely  pursue  without  infamy,  than  defile 
themselves  by  such  fearful  lusts."  As  Rome  can  not 
endure  to  hear  the  truth,  the  compilers  of  the  Belgium 
and  other  Expurgatory  Indices,  did,  some  years  ago, 
order  this  fourth  chapter  of  the  fifth  book  of  Polydore 
Vergil's  work,  for  several  consecutive  pages,  to  be 
expunged. 

There  is  a  curious  document  extant,  a  letter  written 
by  Udalric,  or  Ulrick,  bishop  of  Augusta  (A.  D.  870), 
to  Pope  Nicholas  I.  A  warm  dispute  had  arisen 
between  the  bishop  and  the  Pope  on  the  subject  of 
priestly  marriages,  the  Pope  having  censured  Odo,  the 
archbishop  of  Vienna,  for  permitting  one  of  his  sub- 
deacons  to  marry.  Ulrick  reminded  the  Pope  that 
Gregory  the  Great,  by  a  decree,  had  deprived  priests 
of  their  wives;  shortly  after,  some  fishermen,  instead  of 
making  a  take  of  fish,  took  six  thousand  heads  of  infants 
which  had  been  drowned  in  the  ponds!  When  the 
Pope  heard  of  the  scandal,  the  result  of  his  decree,  he 
immediately  recalled  it,  and  did  acts  of  penance  for  the 


352 


COMPULSORY  CELIBACY. 


occasion  he  had  given  of  so  many  deaths.*  That  the 
prohibition  led  to  great  and  unmentionable  scandals,  no 
one  doubts  who  has  intelligently  read  hi'^tor)'.  Even 
conscientious  Catholics  condemn  the  prohibition. 

Popery  rose  to  its  zenith  in  the  eleventh  century.  It 
culminated  in  Gregory  VII.,  surnamed  Hildebrand. 
He  is  regarded  as  the  greatest  man  that  ever  sat  upon 
the  Papal  throne.  This  period  is  further  remarkable 
for  the  fact  that  now,  for  the  first  time,  the  Pope  took 
upon  himself  to  anathematize  and  depose  an  emperor. 
Gregory  delivered  this  order  of  deposition  in  presence 
of  his  council  and  in  the  form  of  a  solemn  address  to 
the  apostle  Peter.  It  was  hurled  against  the  Emperor 
Henry  IV.  Fleury  says  that  this  was  the  first  time 
that  a  Pope  had  undertaken  to  declare  such  a  sentence, 
and  the  whole  empire  was  thrown  into  astonishment 
and  indignation.!  A.  D.  1090,  chaplets  and  paternos- 
ters were,  with  the  "Office  and  Hours  of  our  Lady," 
invented  by  Peter  the  Hermit  ;J  but  the  former  were 
put  in  general  practice  at  the  recommendation  of 
Dominic  (A.  D.  1230),  and  he  therefore  passed  as  the 
author  of  this  species  of  devotion. 

It  may  be  worth  recording  here,  in  passing,  that  at 
the  Council  of  Clermont,  held  in  November  of  this  year 
(1095),  by  Pope  Urban  II.,  at  the  head  of  thirteen 
archbishops  and  two  hundred  and  fifty  bishops  and 
abbots,  by  the  twenty-eighth  canon  it  was  directed  that 


*Epist.  Udalrici.  apud.  Gerhard,  Loc.  Theolog.  de  Minist.  Eccles., 
lect.  cccxxxix.,  torn,  vi.,  p.  54S,  4to.  Jense,  1619.  The  Latin  text  ii 
before  us,  from  which  the  above  is  quoted. 

fEccl.  Hist.,  torn,  xiii.,  pp.  295,  301.    Paris,  1709. 

JPoljdore  Vergil,  b.  v.,  e.  vii.,  p.  107.    London,  155L 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


353 


all  who  communicated  should  receive  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  under  both  kinds,  unless  there  be 
necessity  to  the  contrary.* 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.  Gen.,  torn,  x.,  col.  506,  can.  28.  Paris,  1671. 


MONASTICISM. 


In  a.  D.  1098,  Robert,  abbot  of  Moleme,  bishop  of 
Burgundy,  founded  a  new  order  of  monks  called  Cister- 
cians, so  called  from  the  place  in  which  he  located  him- 
self, Citeaux,  or  Cistercium,  within  the  bishopric  of 
Chalon,  not  far  from  Dijou,  in  France.  Bruno,  an 
ecclesiastic  of  Cologne,  and  master  of  the  cathedral 
school  at  Rheims  in  1084,  settled  down  at  Chartreux 
(Cartusium),  near  Grenoble,  and  there  founded  the 
order  of  Carthusian  monks.*  In  1185  a  Greek  monk 
(a  priest,  Johannes  Phocus)  visited  Mt.  Carmel,  in  Pales- 
tine, where  he  found  the  ruins  of  an  old  monastery,  and 
where  he  also  found  an  old  priest  of  Calabria,  one 
Berthold,  who  had,  in  consequence  of  a  vision,  erected 
on  this  spot  a  tower  ;ind  small  chapel,  which  he  occu- 
pied, with  about  ten  companions  Hence  arose  the 
order  of  the  Carmelite  monks,  f 

During  all  these  dark  ages  where  was  the  Church 
of  C'lrist  which  his  apostles  established?  It  had 
thoroughly  apostatized.  Usurpers  of  authority  had 
destroyed  it.  A  corrupt  priesthood  had  sold  Jesus 
Christ  for  less  than  thirty  pieces  of  silver.  Bishops 
owned  everything  and  controlled  everything.  The 
mass  of  the  people  were  vassals  in  subjection  to  spirit- 
ual   despots.    The   people   were   shrouded  in  dense 

*Neander's  Church  Hist.,  vol.  vii.,  p.  107.    London,  1852. 
tibid,  vol.  vii.,  p.  369.  (354) 


R  E F O K  M  ATO  K  V  M  O \" EM  E  NTS . 


355 


Ignorance.  While  lordly  bishops  lived  in  splendor  and 
luxury,  and  fared  sumptuously  every  day,  the  mass 
of  the  people  lived  in  squalid  poverty  and  eked  out 
a  miserable  existence.  Ecclesiastics,  then  as  now, 
sought  after  place  and  power,  and  the  saving  of  souls 
in  most  instances  was  a  sham  and  a  pretense.  Tradition 
usurped  the  place  of  God's  word,  and  superstition  was 
substituted  for  piety  and  godliness. 

The  history  of  the  Primitive  Church  is  not  in  the 
record  of  the  Dark  Ages  —  in  the  literature  of  mediaeval 
times.  The  history  of  the  Apostolic  Church  is  found 
in  the  New  Testament.  Practically  little  was  known  of 
the  Church  of  Christ  during  a  period  of  twelve  hundred 
and  sixty  years,  the  prophetical  years  of  the  great  apos- 
tasy. The  Church  was  supplanted  by  the  introduction 
of  countless  innovations.  The  image  of  Jesus  Christ  in 
the  Church  was  well  nigh  obliterated.  A  vile  priest- 
hood had  usurped  the  place  of  King  David's  Greater 
Son.  Tradition  was  sacrilegiously  substituted  for  the 
Word  of  God.  Ordinances,  of  which  the  apostles  were 
absolutely  ignorant,  were  invented  by  a  wily  and  uncon- 
scionable priesthood,  and  made  binding  upon  the  con- 
sciences of  the  ignorant  and  impressible  people,  under 
heavy  and  most  unreasonable  penalties. 

We  have  now  come  to  A.  D.  1123,  where  we  find 
the  marriage  of  the  presbyters,  deacons  and  sub  deacons 
prohibited  by  the  twenty-first  canon  of  the  First  Coun- 
cil of  Lateran.  The  following  is  the  canon  in  ques- 
tion: 

We  entirely  forbid  the  presbyters,  deacons  and  sub-deacons,  and 
monks,  to  contract  marriages  ;  and  we  judge  that  marriages  contracted 


356  MONASTICISM. 

by  these  sort  of  persons  ought  to  be  annulled,  and  the  persons  brought 
to  repentance,  according  to  the  decision  of  the  said  canons.* 

A  similar  canon  was  passed  by  the  Second  Lateran 
Council,  A.  D.  1139,  canons  vi.  and  vii.f 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  x.,  col.  899.    Paris,  1671. 
flhid,  torn.  X.,  cols.  1,003-1,004. 


I 


THE  SEVEN  SACRAMENTS. 


In  a.  D.  1 1 30,  Hugo  de  Victore,  a  Parisian  monk, 
and  Peter  Lombard,  bishop  of  Paris  (1140),  first  asserted 
or  defined  the  sacraments  to  be  seven,  but  this  was  not 
defined  to  be  the^ doctrine  of  the  Church.  The  deter- 
minate number  of  "Seven  Sacraments"  was  mentioned 
for  the  first  time  in  the  instructions  given  to  Otto,  of 
Bamberg,  for  persons  newly  baptized  (A.  D.  1124).* 

The  festival  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the 
Blessed  Virgin  Mary  was  introduced  at  Lyons  about 
this  time  (i  140) ;  but  was  opposed  by  Bernard,  as  a 
novelty  without  the  sanction  of  Scripture  or  of  reason.! 
Bernard  is  a  canonized  saint  of  the  Roman  Church,  and 
is  accounted  as  the  last  of  the  so-called  Fathers.  His 
opinion  on  doctrinal  questions  is  greatly  esteemed  by 
Romanists  of  the  present  day.  When  Bernard  heard  of* 
this  new  festival,  he  wrote  an  epistle  of  protest  to  the 
church  of  Lyons,  wherein  he  said:  "We  can  never 
enough  wonder  that  some  of  you  could  have  the  bold- 
ness to  introduce  a  feast  which  the  Church  has  not  the 
least  knowledge  of,  which  is  neither  supported  by 
reason  nor  backed  by  any  tradition."  He  asserted  that 
the  feast  was  founded  on  an  "alleged  revelation,  which 
is  destitute  of  adequate  authority,"  and  inquired,  "How 
can  it  be  maintained  that  a  conception  which  proceeds, 
not  from  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  ratlier  from  sin,  can  be 

*Neander'B  Church  Hist.,  vol.  vii.,  p.  46o.  London,  1852. 
fFleury,  xiv.,  p.  527,  Paris,  1769,  and  p.  560,  Paris,  1727. 

(357) 


358 


THE  SEVEN  SACRAMENTS. 


holy?  or  how  could  they  conjure  up  a  holy  day  on 
account  of  a  thing  that  is  not  holy  in  itself?"  And  he 
added  that  this  feast  "  eitlier  honors  sin  or  authorizes  a 
false  holiness."*  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  on  what 
ground  the  Church  of  Rome,  after  such  a  declaration  as 
the  above,  could  attempt  to  establish  the  '^immaculate 
conception"  as  a  credible  doctrine;  but,  d&  we  shall  see, 
it  was  not  until  the  fifteenth  century  that  the  dogma 
was  revived  and  made  a  prominent  feature  of  Romish 
theology. 

It  was  Peter  Lombard  who  first  determined  the  three 
parts  of  penance,  viz.:  contrition,  confession  and  satis- 
faction, f 

Gratian's  collections  of  ecclesiastical  decrees,  canons, 
etc.,  were  allowed  and  authorized  by  Pope  Eugene  III. 
(A.  D.  1 151),  who  commanded  them  to  be  studied  in 
the  universities  and  practiced  in  the  spiritual  courts. 
This  is  the  origin  of  what  is  called  the  "Canon  Law.  ' 
Gratian,  who  arranged  this  new  collection  of  ecclesias- 
.tical  laws  at  Bologna,  was  a  Benedictine,  or,  according 
to  another  account,  a  Camaldulensian  monk.  X  Gratian's 
doctrine,  as  to  the  authority  of  this  law,  was  this : 
' '  The  Holy  Roman  Church  gives  authority  to  the 
canons ;  but  she  is  not  bound  by  the  canons,  nor  does 
she  submit  herself  to  them.  As  Jesus  Christ,  who  made 
the  law,  accomplished  the  law  to  sanctify  it  to  himself, 
and,  afterward,  in  order  to  show  that  he  was  its  master, 
dispensed  with  it  and  freed  his  apostles  from  its  bond- 

*S.  Bernard,  epist.  174,  Oper.,  torn,  i.,  pp.  390-391.    Paris,  1839. 
f "  Compunctio  cordis,  confesseoris,  satisfactio  operia,"  Necmder's 
Church  History,  vol.  vii.,  p.  483.    London,  1852. 
^pander's  Church  History,  vol.  vii.,  p.  282. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


359 


age."  The  historian  Fleury  records  these  extravagant 
claims  to  demonstrate  their  falsity.* 

In  A.  D.  li6o.  Alexander  III.  decreed  the  canoniza- 
tioJi  of  saints,  and  ordered  that  none  should  from  that 
date  be  acknowledged  a  saint  unless  declared  to  be  such 
by  a  Pope.    Says  Polydore  Vergil : 

The  fashion  to  deify  men  that  had  done  any  benefits  to  the  common- 
wealth is  one  of  the  most  ancient  usages  that  I  read  of.  For  antiquity, 
even  from  the  beginning,  vas  accustomed  to  make  gods  of  their  kings, 
which,  either  by  abundar.ceof  benefits,  or  notable  qualities  of  prowess, 
had  won  the  hearts  of  ne  commons.  And  especially  the  Romans  did 
that  with  great  porr  and  circumstance,  and  with  many  observances. 
Of  them  our  bis!  ops  learned,  as  by  pattern,  the  rite  of  canonizing 
saints ;  and  the  yearly  sacrifices  that  Gregory  and  Felix  appointed 
concerned  nothing  else  but  to  declare  that  those  martyrs  were  saints, 
and  of  the  household  of  God.  Last  of  all,  Alexander  III.  ordained 
that  no  such  divine  solemnities  should  be  given  to  any  man  openly 
without  he  were  canonized  and  admitted  to  be  a  saint  by  the  bishop  of 
Rome  in  his  bull ;  because  no  man  should  himself  choose  any  private 
saint,  or  commit  any  peculiar  idolatry. t 

Pagans  were  not  allowed  to  offer  up  their  prayers  but 
to  such  as  the  senate,  by  their  suffrage,  had  placed 
among  the  gods.  Tertullian,  in  the  thirteenth  chapter 
of  his  Apology,  referring  to  these  heathen  deities,  said : 

The  condition  of  each  of  our  gods  depends  upon  the  approbation  of 
the  senate ;  those  are  not  gods  whom  men  have  not  decreed  to  be.J 

Thus  far  we  have  discovered  that  Romanism  is  com- 
pounded of  proportionate  parts  of  Judaism,  paganism  and 
Christianity;  paganism  predominating.    It  is  worthy  of 

*Tom.  XV.,  p.  49,  Paris,  1769.  Here  it  is  made  evident  to  the  most 
casual  observer,  that  all  the  arts  of  casuistry  and  sophistry  and  falla- 
cious reasoning  were  resorted  to  by  which  to  deceive  and  enslave  the 
ignorant  masses. 

fR.  vi.,  c.  vi.,  p.  122.    London,  1551. 

JTertullian,  "  Apoligeticus  Adversus  GenteB,"  c.  xiii.,  vol.  v.,  p. 
38,  edit.  Halae  Madg.,  1783. 


360  THE  SEVEN  SACRAMENTS. 

remark  here,  that,  in  1165,  Charlemagne  was  canonized 
by  the  anti-pope  Pascal  III.,  and  though  this  canoniza- 
tion was  made  by  a  usurper,  an  anti-pope,  the  act  has 
never  been  repudiated,  and  his  name  is  still  found  in 
many  calendars.*  The  same  Pope,  Alexander  III.,  is 
said  to  be  the  first  person  who  issued  ^'indulgences." 

In  A.  D.  1 182-3,  important  innovation  took  place 
in  the  election  of  the  Pope  (Lucius  III.).  Hitherto  the 
clergy  and  people  enjoyed  a  voice  in  the  election  ;  but 
now,  by  virtue  of  a  decree  of  the  Third  Lateran  Council 
(A.  D.  1179),  under  Alexander  III.,  the  election  was 
made  by  the  cardinals  alone,  f  It  was  determined  that 
the  individual  chosen  by  two-thirds  of  the  cardinals 
should  be  the  lawful  Pope.  J 

*Fleury,  torn,  xv.,  p.  129,  Paris,  1769,  and  p.  219,  Paris,  1719. 
The  text  in  the  French  language  is  before  us. 

fLabb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  viii.,  col.  1,526,  Paris,  1671.  Fleury, 
vol.  XV.,  p.  437,  Paris,  1769.  Mosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  xi.,  pt.  ii., 
p.  226,  vol.  ii.,  London,  1768. 

JNeander's  Church  History,  vol.  vii.,  p.  233.    London,  1852. 


AURICULAR  CONFESSION. 


Auricular  Confession  was  now  (A.  D.  121 5),  by 
the  Fourth  Lateran  Council,  first  authoritatively  required 
of  all  persons  of  years  of  discretion,  under  pain  of  mor- 
tal sin.*  Confession  was  to  be  made  at  least  once  a 
year.  Fleury  says:  "This  is  the  first  canon  that  I 
know  of  which  has  commanded  general  confession,  "f 

We  have  already  noted,  under  date  of  A.  D.  329,  the 
first  introduction  of  secret  or  private  confession  to  a 
priest,  and  the  suppression  of  the  custom,  and  its  subse- 
quent reintroduction  A.  D.  763.  Finally  we  see  the 
practice  converted  into  a  doctrine  of  the  Papal  Church. 
This  was  another  reintroduction  into  the  apostate  Church 
of  the  heathen  custom,  and  in  this  she  followed  out 
faithfully  the  Babylonian  system,  which  required  a 
secret  confession  to  the  pagan  prie.st,  according  to  a 
prescribed  form,  of  all  who  were  admitted  to  the  "  Mys- 
teries," and  until  such  confession  had  been  made,  no 
complete  initiation  could  take  place.  |  Eusebe  Salverti|| 
refers  to  this  confession  as  observed  in  Greece,  in  rites 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  xi.,  pt.  i.  Concl.  Lat.  IV.,  Decret., 
^ols.  171-17S,  Paris,  n  il. 

fFleury's  Eccl.  Hist.,  torn,  xvi.,  p.  375.    Paris,  1769. 

JSee  a  very  remarkable  book,  "  The  Two  Babylons  ;  or.  The  Papal 
Worship  Proved  to  be  the  Worship  of  Nimrod  and  His  Wife,"  by 
Alexander  llislop.    London  and  Edinburgh,  1862,  Third  Edition,  p. 

ilDcR  Sciences  Occultes,  cap.  xxvi.,  p.  428.    Paris,  1856. 

(361 J 


362 


AURICULAR  CONFESSION. 


that  can  clearly  be  traced  to  Babylonian  origin.  He 
says : 

All  the  Greeks,  from  Delphi  to  Thermophylae,  were  initiated  in  the 
mysteries  of  the  Temple  of  Delphi.  Their  silence  in  regard  to  erery- 
thing  they  were  commanded  to  keep  secret,  was  secured  both  by  the 
fear  of  the  penalties  threatened  to  a  |)erjured  revelation,  and  by  the 
general  confession  exacted  of  the  aspirants  after  initiation — a  confes- 
sion which  caused  them  greater  dread  of  the  indiscretion  of  the  priest, 
than  gave  him  reason  to  fear  their  indiscretion. 

Potter,  in  his  "Greek  Antiquities,"-^  refers  to  this 
confession  in  his  account  of  the  Eleusinian  Mysteries, 
though,  from  fear  of  offending,  he  clotlics  under  the  words 
"  et  cetera"  the  various  subjects  exacted  from  the  peni- 
tent or  postulant  in  the  confessional.  Thus  modern 
Romanism  vies  with  ancient  paganism  even  in  the 
obscenity  which  it  suggests,  and  which  is  equally  char- 
acteristic of  this  modern  spiritual  despotism. 

*Potter,  vol.  i.,  "  Eleasinea,"  p.  356.    Oxford,  1697. 


• 


DECREES  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 


The  Council  of  Trent,  at  the  twenty-second  session 
(A.  D.  121 5),  declared  that  "although  the  mass  do 
contain  in  it  great  instruction  for  the  people,  yet  it  doth 
not  seem  expedient  to  the  fathers  of  the  Council  that  it 
should  be  everywhere  celebrated  in  the  vulgar  tongue."* 
And  they  proceeded  to  decree  that  ' '  whosoever  shall 
say  that  the  mass  ought  to  be  celebrated  in  the  vulgar 
tongue  only,  let  him  be  accursed,  "f 

Who  are  these  "fathers  of  the  council"  anyhow? 
And  these  cardinals,  who  set  themselves  up  in  open 
opposition  to  the  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ?  And  these 
councils,  who,  taking  advantage  of  the  "silence  of  the 
Scriptures,"  and  also  presuming  on  the  ignorance  of  the 
uneducated  herd  of  humanity,  essay  to  build  up  a  hier- 
archy without  the  least  authority  from  the  great  Head 
of  the  Church!  Who  are  these  men,  in  every  age,  who 
have  no  respect  for  the  Word  of  God,  no  reverence  for 
the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ?  Who  are  these 
worms  of  the  dust,  clothed  with  a  little  brief  authority, 
who  place  tradition  above  the  Bible,  and  popes  above 
apostles,  and  "the  Church  "  above  Jesus  Christ?  Surely 
we  "wrestle  not  against  flesh  and  blood,  but  against 
principalities,  against  pow  ers,  against  the  rulers  of  the 
darkness  of  this  world,  against  wicked  spirits  in  high 
places."    Every  effort  is  made  by  the  great  adversary 

*Concl.  Trid.,  sess.  xxii.,  c.  8,  p.  156.    Paris,  1832. 
flbid,  can.  9,  de  sacrificio  Mirsae.  p.  150.    Paris,  1832. 

(3<^3) 


364  DECREES  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 


of  the  soul  to  nullify  the  Word  of  Goc  and  to  render  it 
of  no  effect.  Even  many  who  affect  to  love  the  revealed 
truth,  modify  the  Word  of  God  to  suit  the  times,  invest 
the  gospel  with  meritricious  ornaments  in  order  to 
please  the  people,  and  sell  their  birthrights  for  a  mess 
of  pottage — for  worldly  applause  and  popular  favor. 
The  fear  of  God  is  exchanged  for  the  pleasures  of  sin, 
and  the  treasures  of  the  world  are  esteemed  greater 
riches  than  the  reproaches  for  Christ. 

We  have  stated  that  the  Council  of  Trent,  at  the 
twenty-second  session,  declared  that  "although  the 
mass  do  contain  in  it  great  instruction  for  the  people, 
yet  it  doth  not  seem  expedient  to  the  fathers  of  tlie 
Council  that  it  should  be  everywhere  celebrated  in  the 
vulgar  tongue."  And  they  proceeded  to  decree  that 
"whosoever  shall  say  that  the  mass  ought  to  be  cele- 
brated in  the  vulgar  tongue  only,  let  him  be  accursed." 

When,  how  and  why  this  delusive  dogma  was  intro- 
duced, it  is  difficult  to  say;  but  this  is  the  first  canon 
on  record  which,  so  far  from  making  the  use  of  the 
vulgar  tongue  compulsory,  anathematizes  those  who 
should  declare  that  the  service  should  be  performed  in 
the  language  known  to  the  people.  It  is  clear  to  be 
seen  that  the  decree  of  Trent  is  directly  contrary  to  the 
previous  canon  passed  at  the  Fourth  Lateran  Council  in 
A.  D.  1 2 15;  and  which  council  is  esteemed  among 
Romanists  as  a  general  council.  The  words  of  the 
ninth  canon  are  as  follows: 

Because  in  most  parts  there  are  within  the  same  state  or  diocese  peo- 
ple of  different  languages  mixed  together,  having  under  one  faith 
yarious  rites  and  customs ;  we  distinctly  charge  that  the  bishops  of 
these  states  or  dioceses  provide  proper  persons  to  celebrate  the  divine 
oflSces,  and  administer  the  sacraments  of  the  Church  according  to  th* 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


differences  of  rites  and  languages,  instructing  them  both  by  word  and 
by  example.* 

Here,  then,  is  a  decree  of  a  reputed  general  council, 
in  a  most  distinct  and  emphatic  manner  directing  the 
sacred  offices  and  sacraments  of  the  Church  to  be 
administered  in  the  language  understood  by  the  people. 
It  may  be  added  that  the  Pope,  in  his  own  decretals, 
publicly  declared  to  the  same  effect  in  these  words: 

We  command  that  the  bishops  of  such  cities  and  dioceses  where 
nations  are  mingled  together,  provide  meet  men  to  minister  the  holy 
service  according  to  the  diversities  of  their  manners  and  languages.f 

And  Cassander  certified  that  the  prayers,  and  espe- 
cially the  words  of  consecration,  were  so  read  by  the 
ancient  Christians  that  all  the  people  might  understand.^ 

That  modern  Romanists  have  changed  the  ancient 
custom  is  positively  certain.  So  little  do  the  mass  of 
the  Pope's  subjects  understand  the  Latin  service  as  it 
proceeds,  that  the  people  not  unfrequently  read  other 
prayers  while  the  regular  service  is  proceeding,  and  this 
is  permitted,  if  not  encouraged,  by  the  priests.  Though 
the  real  corporeal  presence  of  our  Lord  in  the  "sacra- 
ment" was  insisted  upon  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  not 
until  the  Fourth  Lateran  Council,  under  Innocent  III., 
that  the  bread  was  declared  to  be  transubstantiated  into 
the  body,  and  the  wine  into  the  blood  of  Christ ;  and 
thus  the  speculative  idea  of  transubstantiation  became, 
for  the  first  time,  an  article  of  faith  by  decree  of  a  gen- 
eral council ;  or,  as  Neander  expresses  it,  the  dogma 


*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  xi.,  p.  161.    Paris,  1671. 
tDecret,  Greg.,  lib.  3,  tit.  31,  de  offic.  Jud.  Ord.,  c.  14.  See 
^'assander  Liturg.,  p.  87.    Paris,  1610. 
JCassand.  Litnrg.,  c.  28,  p.  17.    Colon,  1558. 


366 


DECREES  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 


was  "definitely  settled  by  the  Church  at  the  Lateran 
Council,  1215."* 

The  canon  reads  as  follows: 

But  there  is  one  universal  church  of  the  faithful,  out  of  which  no 
one  at  all  is  naved  ;  in  which  Jesus  Christ  himself  is  at  once  priest  and 
sacrifice:  whose  body  and  blood  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  are 
truly  contained  under  the  species  of  bread  and  wine,  which,  tlirougli 
the  divine  power,  are  transubstantiated — the  bread  into  the  body,  and 
the  wine  into  the  blood,  that,  for  the  fulfillment  of  the  mystery  of 
unity,  we  may  receive  of  his  that  which  he  received  of  ours.f 

In  pursuance  of  this  decree,  it  was  ordered  that  all 
churches  should  be  furnished  with  a  cabinet  or  cup- 
board, in  which  to  keep  the  consecrated  host  not  used  ; 
hence  the  use  of  "  pyxes  "  began.  Hitherto  the  surplus 
bread  and  wine  were  either  given  away  or  burned.  The 
"host"  is  supposed  to  be  "very  God."  "We  com- 
mand [said  Innocent]  that  in  all  churches  the  eucharist 
be  kept  under  lock  and  key,  that  it  may  not  be  touched 
by  sacrilegious  hands."  Arnobius,  a  Christian  writer 
of  the  third  century,  ridiculed  the  pagans  for  locking 
up  tb.cir  gods  for  a  similar  reason.  "  Why  keep  them 
locked  up?  Is  it  for  fear  thieves  should  take  them 
away  by  night?  If  you  are  assured  they  are  gods, 
leave  to  them  the  care  of  keeping  themselves ;  leave 
their  temples  always  open.  "J 

*Neander8  Church  Hist.,  vol.  vii.,  p.  466.    London,  1852. 

fLabb.  Conci.,  torn,  xi.,  p.  143.    Paris,  1671. 

JArnob.  Notitia  Literaria,  lib.  vi.,  vol.  i.    Edit.  Lips.,  1816. 


ELEVATION  OF  THE  HOST. 


^  In  a.  D.  1217,  Honorius  III.  instituted  the  elevation 
'  and  adoration  of  the  host  {Sacerdos  quilibet  frequenter 
doceat  plebon  suam  ut  cum  in  celebtatione  missariutn 
elevatur  hostia  salutaris  quilibet  reverenter  inclinet.  See 
Raynaldus  ad.  an.  12 19).  These  words  are  in  Honorius' 
epistle  to  the  Latin  bishops  of  the  patriarchate  of 
Antioch,  A.  D.  12 18.  Fleury  expressly  states  that  the 
custom  of  elevating  the  host  before  the  consecration  of 
the  chalice,  was  not  in  use  until  the  beginning  of  this 
century.*  The  early  Christian  writers  repeatedly  and 
most  fully  describe  the  way  and  manner  of  receiving 
the  bread  and  wine,  but  we  find  no  mention  whatever 
of  the  elevation  and  adoration  of  the  host.  Further: 
"From  the  oldest  liturgies,  and  the  eucharistic  forms 
in  them,  it  appears  that  there  was  no  such  adoration 
given  to  the  sacrament  till  of  late,  for  in  none  of  them 
is  there  any  such  mention,  either  by  the  priest  or  by 
the  people,  as  in  the  Roman  missal  or  ritual,  nor  any 
such  forms  of  prayer  added  to  it,  as  in  their  breviary." 

Cassander,  a  learned  Roman  Catholic  writer,  who 
died  A.  D.  1566,  f  has  collected  together  most  of  the 
old  liturgies,  and  endeavors,  as  far  as  he  can,  to  show 
their  agreement  with  that  of  the  Roman  Church  ;  but 
neither  in  the  old  Greek,  nor  in  the  old  Latin  works,  is 

*Fleury,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vol.  xv.,  liv.,  74,  p.  G63.  Paris,  1719;  and 
torn.  XV.,  p.  -580.    Paris,  1709. 

tCaseandri  Liturgie,  oper,  p.  10,  etc.    Paris,  1616. 

(367) 


3^8 


ELEVATION"  OF  THE  HOST. 


there  any  instance  to  be  produced  of  the  priests  or  of 
the  people  adoring  the  sacrament  as  soon  as  the  priest 
had  consecrated  it.  Notwithstanding  the  elevation  and 
adoration  being  one  of  the  most  prominent  features  of 
the  modern  Roman  service,  this  last  was  added  or 
brought  into  the  Roman  Liturgy  after  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation  was  established  in  that  Church,  which 
has  produced  a  consequent  alteration,  not  only  in  their 
liturgy,  but  even  their  religion  in  good  part,  and  made 
a  new  sort  of  worship,  unknown,  not  only  in  the  first 
and  best  times  of  the  Church,  but  for  above  a  thousand 
years  after  Christ.*  It  should  be  noted,  in  this  con- 
nection, that  Cardinal  Guido  seems  not  to  have  contem- 
plated an  adoration  of  the  host,  but  that  on  the  eleva- 
tion the  people  should  pray  for  pardon. f 

The  ritualists  Bona,  Merati,  Benedict  XIV.,  Le  Brun, 
ct  al.,  acknowledge  that  there  is  no  trace  of  the  custom 
of  the  elevation  of  the  host  before  the  eleventh  and 
twelfth  centuries,  in  the  West.  J  The  elevation  of  the 
host  appears  to  have  been  first  introduced  into  the 
diocese  of  Paris  about  A.  D.  1200,  by  Odo  de  SuUi, 
bishop  of  Paris; II  and  even  so  late  as  A.  D.  1536  the 
Synod  of  Cologne  explained  that  the  people  should,  on 
the  elevation  of  the  host,  remember  the  Lord's  death 
and  return  thanks  with  minds  raised  to  heaven.  §  The 

*See  Giboon's  Preservative  Against  Popery,  new  edit.,  p.  141,  vol. 
X.,  London,  1848,  and  where  the  places  alleged  by  Romanists  out  of 
the  early  Christian  writers  in  support  of  the  custom  are  examined  end 
explained. 

tRayn.ildns  an,  1203. 

JSee  Pahner's  Treatise  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  vol.  i.,  p.  240. 
London, 1842. 

||Harduini  Concilia,  torn,  xi.,  p.  1,945. 

^Synod,  Colon,  an.  1,536,  pars,  ii.,  can.  14,  Lab.  torn.,  xiv.  Paris, 
1671. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


veneration  or  adoration  of  the  host  itself  was  not 
actually  enjoined  until  155 1,  by  the  sixth  canon  of  the 
thirteenth  session  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  fifth 
chapter  declares  that  there  is  no  room  for  doubting  that 
all  the  faithful  of  Christ,  "according  to  the  custom  ever 
received  in  the  Catholic  Church,  exhibit  in  veneration 
the  worship  of  Latvia,  which  is  the  supreme  worship 
due  to  God,  to  the  sacrament."  And  the  sixth  canon 
anathematizes  those  who  deny  that  the  eucharist  ' '  is 
not  to  be  proposed  publicly  to  the  people  to  be  wor- 
shiped." Latvia,  the  highest  kind  of  worship,  or  that 
paid  to  God :  distinguished  by  the  Roman  Catholics 
from  Dulia,  or  the  inferior  worship  paid  to  saints. 

The  custom  of  worshiping  or  praying  before  the 
elevated  host,  as  before  explained,  was  easily  converted 
into  an  actual  worship  of  the  elements  as  Christ,  but  no 
fixed  date  can  be  assigned  to  the  transition.  That  the 
elements  themselves,  however,  were  worshiped  before 
the  passing  of  this  canon,  is  certainly  evident  by  unmis- 
takable facts.  Fisher,  the  Romish  bishop  of  Roches- 
ter, A.  D.  1504,  said  that  if  there  was  nothing  more  in 
the  eucharist  but  bread,  then  the  whole  Church  for 
sixteen  centuries  had  committed  idolatry,  for  during  all 
this  time  people  must  have  been  worshiping  the  creature 
in  place  of  the  Creator.* 

We  can  not,  however,  trace  any  record  of  the  fact 
that  the  host  was  worshiped  by  the  people,  under  the 
supposition  of  Christ's  presence  therein,  before  the  time 
of  Durand,  bishop  of  Mende,  who  mentioned  it  A.  D. 
1286.  t    John  Daille,  a  faithful  and  diligent  searcher  of 

*Fi8her,  Roffeus,  cont.,  GSoolum]).  oper.,  p.  760.    Wircebu'gr  1597. 

fSee  his  Rationale  Divinorum  Officiiim  IV.,  41. 

25 


370 


ELEVATION  OF  THE  HOST. 


antiquity,  says  that  he  could  not  find  "among  the 
interpreters  of  ecclesiastical  offices  in  the  Latin  Church, 
the  mention  of  any  sort  of  elevation  before  the  eleventh 
century.* 


•Dallseus  de  Relig.  Cult.  Object.,  lib.  2,  c.  5.    Gen.,  1664. 


BIBLE  FORBIDDEN  TO  THE  LAITY. 


The  Bible  was  now  (A.  D.  1229),  for  the  first  time, 
forbidden  to  the  "laity"*  by  the  Council  of  Toulouse. 
The  decree  was  as  follows:  "We  forbid  also  the  per- 
mitting of  the  laity  to  have  the  books  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  unless  any  should  wish,  from  a  feeling 
of  devotion,  to  have  a  psalter  or  breviary  for  divine 
service.  But  we  most  strictly  forbid  them  to  have  the 
above-mentioned  books  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  "f  This 
council  was  attended  by  the  legate  of  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  three  archbishops,  and  several  bishops  and  other 
dignitaries.  I  Gregory  IX.  (A.  D.  1230)  added  the 
little  bell,  to  inform  the  people  when  to  kneel  down  to 
adore  the  host. 

We  are  informed  by  Alberic,  in  his  Chronicon  ad  Ann.,  that  the 
Cistercian  abbot,  Guido,  whom  the  Pope  had  created  a  cardinal  and 
dispatched  as  his  legate  to  Cologne,  first  introduced  this  practice  at 
the  elevation  of  the  host  in  the  mass,  on  a  signal  given  by  a  bell,  for 
the  people  to  prostrate  themselves  and  remain  in  that  jjosture  until  the 
benediction  of  the  cup.|| 

It  appears,  however,  that  William,  bishop  of  Paris, 
about  A.  D.  1220,  also  ordered  a  bell  to  be  rung  at  the 
elevation,  that  the  people  might  be  excited  to  pray,  but 
not  to  worship  the  host.§ 

»Tom.  xvi.,  p.  633. 

tLabb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  xi.,  part  i.,  col.  425^  Concl.  Tolasanum, 
can.  xiv.    Paris,  1671.    The  Latin  text  is  before  us. 

JSee  Massy's  "Secret  History  of  Romanism,"  pp.  72,  73.  London, 
1853. 

IIMosheira's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  xii.,  pt.  ii.,  c.  iv.,  s.  ii.,  p.  42.'3,  note  2. 
Edit.  London,  1852. 

§Bini.  Concilia.,  torn,  vii.,  pars,  i.,  p.  536.    Paris,  1636. 

(371) 


RED  HATS,  SCARLET  CLOAKS,  CORPUS 
CHRISTL 


We  have  now  descended  into  the  darkest  portion  of 
the  Dark  Ages,  where  the  ApostoHc  Church  has  entirely 
lost  its  identity,  and  wliere  it  seems  almost  impossible 
to  trace  one  feature  of  the  spiritual  image  of  Jesus 
Christ.  The  Son  of  God  and  the  apostles  have  been 
jostled  to  one  side  by  the  encroachments  of  a  daring 
and  corrupt  priesthood,  while  mysticism  and  supersti- 
tion of  the  most  degraded  types  have  supplanted  the 
plain  lessons  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Ignorance  of  the 
densest  kind  stalks  abroad,  the  public  mind  is  beclouded 
with  visions  and  dreams,  fleecy  and  nebulistic,  and  the 
priest-ridden  people  are  fed  upon  the  vagaries  of  dis- 
torted imaginations. 

In  A.  D.  1237,  the  anthem  Salve  Regina  (Hail,  O 
Queen,  ?'.  e.,  the  Virgin  Mary)  was  introduced  by 
request  of  the  preaching  friars.  * 

In  1238  the  patriarch  of  Antioch  excommunicated 
Gregory  IX.  and  the  whole  Roman  Church,  as  being 
stained  with  a  constant  course  of  simony,  usury,  and  all 
kinds  of  crimes,  f 

In  1245  the  Council  of  Lyons  ordered  that  cardinals 
should  wear  red  hats  and  scarlet  cloaks,  "  to  show  the 
readiness  with  which  they  are  prepared  to  shed  their 
blood  for  the  liberty  of  the  Church."    According  tO' 

*Fleury  XVII.,  p.  204.    Paris,  17(59. 
flbid,  p.  22.5.  (372) 


KEFOKMATOKY  MOVEMENTS. 


373 


Polydore  Vergil,  Innocent  IV.  (A.  D.  1254),  by  decree, 
ordered  cardinals  to  wear  the  red  hat,  and  Paul  II.  (A. 
D.  1464),  the  scarlet  robes.  * 

In  1264  Urban  IV.,  upon  the  pretended  revelation  of 
a  nun,  instituted  the  festival  of  Corpus  Christi  (known  in 
France  as  the  Fete  Dieii)  and  its  octaves.  The  institu- 
tion was  confirmed  under  Clement  V.  at  a  council  held 
at  Vienna  in  131  i.f  Thomas  Aquinas  composed  the 
office.  The  following  is  from  Canon  Wordsworth's 
"Tour  in  Italy  "  : 

The  history  of  the  institution  of  this  festival  is  very  significant.  In 
tiie  thirteenth  century  (A.  D.  1202),  a  time  of  moral  corruption  and 
ungodliness,  as  Ruman  writers  testify,  a  priest  who  did  not  believe 
the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  w:is  celebrating  mass  at  Bolsona,  ia 
Tuscany,  and  saw  the  host  trickle  with  blood,  which  is  the  subject  of 
Raffaelle's  frescoes  in  the  Vatican  in  the  stanza  of  Heliodorus.  Pope 
Urban  IV.  heard  tlie  tidings  of  the  prodigy,  and  went  to  Bolsena  and 
gave  orders  that  the  corporal  tinged  with  blood  should  be  carried  in 
procession  to  the  catliedral  of  Orvieto,  where  it  is  still  exhibited.  In 
the  year  1230,  a  holy  woman,  near  Liege,  a  Cistercian  nun,  Santa 
Giuiiana,  had  a  vision,  in  which  she  beheld  tlie  moon,  which,  although 
full,  seemed  to  have  a  portion  of  it  broken  off  ;  and  when  she  asked 
what  was  the  meaning  of  this  fragmentary  appearance,  she  was 
informed  that  the  moon  represented  the  Church,  and  the  gap  in  it 
denoted  the  absence  of  a  great  solemnity  which  was  necessary  to  com- 
plete its  fullness;  and  that  this  solemnity  was  the  festival  of  Corpus 
Domini.X  It  was  revealed  as  the  divine  will  tliat  a  certain  day  in 
every  year  should  be  set  apart  for  the  veneration  of  the  holy  sacrament. 
The  bishop  of  Liege  adopted  the  suggestion,  and  it  was  confirmed  by 
the  apostolic  legate  in  Belgium.  Pope  Urban  IV.,  being  stimulated 
by  what  occurred  in  Bolsena,  and  desirous  of  providing  a  perpetual 


*Polydore Vergil,  De  Invent.  Rer.,  b.  iv.,  c.  vi.,  p.  90.  London,  lool. 

fMosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  xiii.,  pt.  ii.,  c.  iv.,  s.  ii.,  London, 

1825.    Neander's  Church  History,  vol.  vii.,  p.  474,  London,  18")2. 

JThis  account  of  the  origin  of  the  festival  may  be  seen  in  a  work 

now  in  the  fifteenth  edition,  by  Dom  Guiseppe  Riva.  Penitentiary  of 
the  Cathedral  of  Milan,  A.  D.  1862,  p.  300. 


374      RED  HATS,  SCARLET  CLOAKS,  CORPUS  CHKISTL 


protest  against  the  doctrines  of  Berengarius,  which  were  then  rife, 
carried  the  matter  further,  and  decreed  that  the  festival  of  the  Corpus 
Domini  should  be  celebrated  every  year  on  the  Thursday  after  the 
octave  of  Whit  Sund:iy,  and  he  gave  a  commission  to  tlie  celebrated 
Thomas  Aquinas  (the  "  doctor  Angelicus  "),  tlien  at  Rome,  to  compose 
a  suitable  religious  office  for  the  occasion. 

The  annual  observance  of  the  festival  has  received 
additional  sanction  from  the  Council  of  Trent  in  1551.* 
Thomas  Aquinas  likewise  invented  the  theory  of 
"works  of  supererogation  and  celestial  treasoire," 
being  the  supposed  superabundant  merits  of  Christ  and 
the  saints,  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  Pope,  to  be 
issued  by  him  by  way  of  indulgences,  f  On  the  subject 
of  indulgences,  we  quote  from  Mosheim.  "The  bish- 
ops," he  says,  "when  they  wanted  money  for  their 
private  pleasures,  or  for  the  exigencies  of  the  Church, 
granted  to  their  flock  the  power  of  purchasing  the 
remission  of  the  penalties  imposed  upon  transgressors, 
by  a  sum  of  money,  which  was  to  be  applied  to  certain 
religious  purposes;  or,  in  other  words,  the  purchased 
indulgences,  which  became  an  inexhaustible  source  of 
opulence  to  the  episcopal  orders,  and  enabled  them,  as 
is  well  known,  to  form  and  execute  the  most  difficult 
schemes  for  the  enlargement  of  their  authority,  and  to 
erect  a  multitude  of  sacred  edifices,  which  augmented 
considerably  the  external  pomp  and  splendor  of  the 
Church.  To  justify,  therefore,  these  scandalous  meas- 
ures of  the  pontiffs,  a  most  monstrous  and  absurd  doc- 
trine was  now  invented  by  St.  Thomas  in  the  following 
century  (the  thirteenth),  and  which  contained,  among 
others,  the  following  enormities:  'That  there  actually 
existed  an  immense  treasure  of  merit  composed  of  the 


'Sess.  XIII.,  cap.  5. 

fMosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  xii.,  pt.  ii.,  c.  iii.,  s.  iii.    London,  1825. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


375 


pious  deeds  and  virtuous  actions  vi^hich  the  saints  had 
performed  beyond  what  was  necessary  for  their  own  sal- 
vation, and  which  therefore  was  appHcable  to  the  benefit 
of  others;  that  the  guardian  and  dispenser  of  this  pre- 
cious treasure  was  the  Roman  pontiff ;  and  that,  of  con- 
sequence, he  was  empowered  to  assign  to  such  as  he 
thought  proper  a  portion  of  this  inexhaustible  source  of 
merit,  suitable  to  their  respective  guilt,  and  sufficient  to 
deliver  them  from  the  punishment  due  to  their  crimes! ' 
It  is  a  most  deplorable  mark  of  the  power  of  superstition, 
that  a  doctrine  so  absurd  in  its  nature,  and  so  pernicious 
in  its  effects,  should  yet  be  retained  and  defended  by  the 
Church  of  Rome."* 

Jubilees,  at  the  expiration  of  fifty  years,  and,  finally, 
at  the  expiration  of  thirty-three  years,  were  connected 
with  the  sale  of  indulgences.  Thirty-three  years  were 
made  to  correspond  with  the  life  of  our  Savior !  The 
pecuniary  profit  to  Rome  by  these  jubilees  was  enor- 
mous, as  they  brought  together  in  that  city  an  immense 
concourse  of  the  devout  (?)  to  gain  the  benefit  of  the 
plenary  indulgence,  who  paid  ready  cash  in  exchange. 
People  came  professedly  to  have  their  sins  wiped  away, 
but,  if  we  are  to  credit  the  Roman  Catholic  historian, 
Fleury,  another  effect  was  produced.  He  tells  us  that 
Alexander  VI.  proclaimed  a  jubilee  in  A.  D.  1500;  and 
although  the  numbers  in  attendance  were  not  so  numer- 
ous as  on  former  occasions,  on  account  of  the  wars 
which  then  troubled  Italy,  yet  "license  and  disorder 
reigned  at  Rome  beyond  any  other  place  in  the  world. 
Crime  was  on  the  throne ;  and  never,  perhaps,  had  so 


*Mo8lieiiii's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  xii.,  cap.  iii.,  sec.  3,  London,  1825. 
See  also  Neaadcr's  Church  History,  vol.  vii.,  p.  485,  London,  1852. 


3/6      RED  HATs,  SCARLET  CLOAKS,  CORPUS  CHRISTL 

monstrous  a  corruption  of  morals  been  seen,  especially 
among  the  clergy."* 

In  A.  D.  1300,  Boniface  VIII.  instituted  the  first 
jubilee,  and  ordered  by  Papal  bull  that  it  should  in  the 
future  be  solemnized  once  in  every  one  hundred  years, 
although,  as  already  noted,  this  period  was  subsequently 
abridged  by  successive  popes. 

Polydore  Vergil  says  that  Boniface  ' '  assigned  the 
years  according  to  the  old  feast  of  Apollo  and  Diana, 
which  the  Roman  heathens  solemnized  every  one  hun- 
dred years,  and  that  they  were  called  ^ Liidi  scculaiies.'  " 
These  jubilees,  he  testifies,  included  "a  clean  remission, 
a  pena  et  culpa,  as  well  from  the  punishment  as  from  the 
sin  itself"!  Cardinal  Parie,  referring  to  the  jubilee,  in 
a  letter  to  Pope  Paul  II.,  designates  it  as  an  imitation 
of  the  "  early  superstition.  "J 

Henry  Cornelius  Agrippi  said  that  "the  power  of 
granting  indulgences,  extending  to  souls  in  purgatory, 
was  first  decreed  by  Boniface  VIII. "|| 

In  A.  D.  13 17,  John  XXII.  published  what  are  called 
the  "Clementine  Constitutions" — the  several  writings, 
partly  genuine  and  partly  spurious,  erroneously  ascribed 
to  Clement,  one  of  the  apostolic  fathers,  and  bishop  of 
Rome  from  A.  D.  92-102,  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
them  greater  weight  and  more  popular  currency.  The 
same   Pope   ordered   the  Ave  Mana,   on  the  words 

*Fleury's  Eccl.  Hist.,  torn,  xxiv,,  p.  399.    Paris,  1769. 
fB.  viii.,  c.  i.,  p.  144.    London,  1551. 

J"Antiquae  vanitates."  See  Picard's  "  Ceremonies  et  Contumes 
Keligieuses,"  torn,  i.,  pt.  ii.,  p.  168.    Amsterdam,  1723. 

||De  incertitudine  et  vanitate  scientiarum  atque  artium,  c.  61,  p. 
115,  Lugd,  8.  a.  (1531).  Agrippi  was  a  physician,  philosopher  and 
theologian,  and  died  1535.  An  English  translation  of  this  book  was 
published  in  London,  1684,  8to. 


REFOKMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


377 


addressed  by  the  angel  Gabriel  to  the  Blessed  Virgin,  to 
be  added  to  the  prayers  of  Christians.  The  procession, 
or  carrying  about  of  the  "host"  under  a  canopy,  was 
first  instituted  in  A.  D.  1360.  Virgil,  in  his  first  book 
of  the  Georgics,  refers  to  the  custom  of  the  annual  cele- 
bration of  the  feast  of  Ceres,  directing  the  farmers  to 
accompany  the  hostia,  when  carried  in  procession  : 

"  Annua  magnae  sacra  refer  Cereri 

******* 

Terque  novas  circum  felix  eat  hostia  fruges." 

— B.  i.,  338-345. 

And  Ovid  tells  us  that  those  who  followed  carried 
lighted  tapers  and  were  clothed  in  white.  And  so  does 
the  Romish  ritual  direct  that  the  priest  who  carries  be 
covered  with  a  white  cape,  and  that  all  who  accompany 
him  have  lighted  tapers  in  their  hands. 

The  Pastophorae  (initiated  women  in  the  religious 
processions  of  the  ancient  Egyptians)  carried  the  Horus 
in  a  box  (pix)  before  them,  and  at  stated  intervals  fell 
on  their  knees  and  offered  the  idol  to  the  adoration  of 
the  multitude.  May  not  this  have  been  the  origin  of 
the  custom  in  the  Latin  Church  of  carrying  the  wafer  in 
a  box,  with  considerable  ceremony,  attended,  as  it  is, 
with  the  adoration  of  the  "multitude"  in  many  Romish 
countries?  The  language  of  Clemens  Alexandrinus* 
(who  mentions  the  Pastophoraef),  with  respect  to  the 
removing  of  the  veil  of  the  box,  and  the  directions  in 
the  Canon  Missce,  are  curiously  similar.  The  words  of 
the  mass  book  would  seem  to  be  almost  a  translation  of 
the  oXiyov  k-rzavaarzihi-  too  z/LzaTZtTaa^axor:  dti^wv  rov 
Ssd]y,  referred  to  by  Clemens. 

*See  the  Greek  Thesaurus  of  Stephens.    Valpy's  editioa,  vol.  i.,  p. 

183. 

fPaed,  3,  2. 


SjS      RED  HATS,  SCARLET  CLOAKS,  CORPUS  CHRISTL 


Urban  V.  (A.  D.  1362)  was  the  first  who  wore  the 
triple  crown.  The  Triregne,  as  the  ItaHans  call  it, 
seems  to  have  been  of  early  date;  so  far  back,  it  is  stated 
(but  on  no  sufficient  authority),  as  the  time  of  Clovis, 
"the  first  Christian  king,"  who  sent  one  to  Hormisdas, 
bishop  of  Rome  (A.  D  520),  as  a  pledge  that  he  owed 
his  kingdom,  not  to  his  sword,  but  to  God.  But  this 
gift  was  not  to  the  bishop,  but  to  the  apostle  Peter 
alone;  the  crown  was  to  be  suspended  before  the  altar, 
where  the  relics  of  the  apostle  were  supposed  to  be 
deposited.  The  first  bishop  of  Rome  mentioned  in  his- 
tory who  was  crowned,  was  Damasus  II.  Before  Bishoj) 
Mark  (A.  D.  335)  no  trace  exists  of  evidence  that  bish- 
ops of  Rome  wore  any  sort  of  crown,  except  what  was 
called  the  martj'r's  crown.  According  to  some  writers, 
up  to  the  time  of  Boniface  VIII.  (A.  D.  1294),  bishops 
of  Rome  wore  a  tiara  closed  at  the  top.  This  bishop 
added  to  this  a  second.  The  triple  crown  was  ordered 
to  be  carried  in  procession,  as  a  mark  of  the  assumed 
triple  jurisdiction  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  over  the  uni- 
verse.* Triple  crown  denotes  three  degrees  of  power, 
embracing  the  political  as  well  as  the  ecclesiastical. 

The  meanest  men  on  earth  are  those  who  steal  the 
livery  of  heaven  to  serve  the  devil  in.  The  greatest 
"saint"  may  become  the  greatest  rascal.  Rome  has 
canonized  in  her  calendar  of  saints  some  of  the  greatest 
rogues  the  world  has  ever  known. 

The  facts  we  are  reproducing  from  the  pages  of 
history,  and  which  we  are  presenting  to  our  readers  in 
the  order  of  time,  are  thoroughly  reliable,  and  remain 
unquestioned  by  the  intelligent  reader  of  histor>'.    It  is 

*See  Picard's  "  Ceremonies  et  Contumes  Religieiues,"  vol.  i.,  p.  ii., 
pp.  50-52,  notes  h  and  a.    Amsterdam,  1723. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


379 


>in  jnsavory  dish  to  the  Roman  Catholic  priesthood,  but 
they  must  gulp  it  down  as  a  nauseous  drug.  Even  to 
this  hour  the  nations  of  earth  are  reeling  under  the 
baneful  opiate  influence  of  the  Mother  of  Harlots,  who 
still  continues  to  effect  political  alliances  with  the  gov- 
ernments of  the  world,  and  to  conclude  concordats  with 
the  princes  of  this  world.  This  "prince  of  the  air"  is 
"the  spirit  that  works  in  the  children  of  disobedience." 


INDULGENCES. 


History  informs  us  that  Urban  V.  (1366)  was  the  first 
who  sent  to  Joanna,  queen  of  Sicily,  a  rose  of  gold  in 
Lent,  and  decreed  the  consecration  of  a  like  toy  every 
year  upon  Lent  Sunday.    The  custom  is  still  observed. 

The  historians  Platina  and  Polydore  Vergil  say  that 
Boniface  IX.  (1390)  was  the  first  who  sold  indulgences 
and  made  merchandise  of  them.  Polydore  Vergil* 
said:  "  Who  was  the  first  author  of  them  (indulgences)? 
I  have  not  read  in  any  writer,  saving  that  Gregory  pro- 
claimed pardons  as  a  reward  of  those  who  came  to  his 
stations.  This  seed  sown  by  Gregory  grew  to  a  ripe 
harvest  in  the  time  of  Boniface  IX.,  who  reaped  the 
money  for  that  chaff.  For  what  cause,  or  by  what 
authority,  indulgences  were  first  introduced  into  the 
Church,  has  given  modern  divines  a  great  deal  of 
trouble.  In  a  subject  which  is  by  no  means  clear,  I 
think  it  better  to  use  the  testimony  of  John,  bishop  of 
Rochester,  [Bishop  Fisher,  A.  D.  I504],t  in  a  work  he 
wrote  against  Luther:  'Many  persons,'  said  he,  'are 
inclined  to  place  but  little  reliance  upon  indulgences, 
because  their  use  seems  to  have  come  in  rather  late  in 
the  Church.'  And  then  he  adds:  'No  orthodox  [Roman 
Catholic]  doubts  whether  there  is  purgatory,  concerning 
which,  nevertheless,  there  is  either  no  mention  or  the 
very  rarest  mention  in  ancient  writers.    To  this  day 

*B.  viii.,  c.  i.,  p.  144.  London,  1551;  and  p.  476.  Amstel.,  1671. 
f  Roffeus,  art.  18,  contra  Lutherum,  fol.  132.    Colon,  1624. 

(380) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMEiNTS. 


purgatory  is  not  believed  in  by  the  Greek  Church.  As 
long,  then,  as  there  was  no  anxiety  concerning  purga- 
tory, no  one  looked  for  indulgences ;  for  all  the  value 
of  indulgences  depends  upon  it.  If  you  take  away 
purgatory,  what  use  will  there  be  in  indulgences  ? 
Indulgences,  therefore,  began  when  the  people  began  to 
entertain  fears  about  the  torments  of  purgatory.'  These 
things  saith  the  bishop  Fisher ;  but  you,  my  readers, 
may  perhaps  think  the  subject  of  so  great  importance 
that  you  might  expect  more  certainty  in  the  matter 
from  the  mouth  of  God." 

It  was  in  the  Council  of  Constance  (A.  D.  1414)  that 
the  laity  {lais — people)  were  first,  by  the  authority  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  deprived  of  the  cup  at  the  Lord's 
Supper.  The  decree  admits  that  Christ's  ordinance  was 
in  both  kinds,  and  that  the  custom  in  the  primitive 
Church,  in  this  respect,  was  to  give  both  the  elements 
to  the  people,  "notwithstanding  which,"  it  decreed  that 
the  laity  should  be  deprived  of  the  cup.*  Previous  to 
this  date,  and  from  1220,  when  the  adoration  of  the 
host  was  instituted,  the  custom  was  introduced  and 
partially  adopted,  but  not  universally  admitted  by  the 
Church  of  Rome. 

It  was  in  A.  D.  1438  that  the  Gallican  Church  took 
a  decided  stand  against  the  usurpation  of  Rome.  The 
Council  of  Bourges,f  convoked  by  Charles  VII.,  who 
presided,  drew  up  the  decree,  containing  twenty-three 
articles,  which  formed  the  basis  of  what  was  called  the 
Pragmatic  Sanction,  when  confirmed  by  the  French 
Parliament,  July  13,  1439.    These  constitutions,  which 

•Labb.  et  Cobs  Concilia,  torn,  xii.,  col.  09.  Paris,  1672.    The  Latin 
lext  is  before  us. 
fLabb.  et  Coss..  torn,  xii.,  col.  1,429.    Paris,  1672. 


382 


INDULGENCES. 


were  called  the  rampart  of  the  Gallican  Church,  took 
away  from  the  popes  most  of  the  power  they  possessed 
of  presenting  to  benefices  and  of  judging  in  ecclesiastical 
causes  in  the  kingdom  of  France;  and  this  independent 
power  was  retained  until  the  concordat  with  Rome, 
made  between  Leo  X.  and  King  Francis  I.,  at  Bologna. 
The  Pragmatic  Sanction  was  abrogated  by  the  Pope's» 
bull  at  the  eleventh  session  of  the  Lateran  Council, 
A.  D.  1516.* 

The  Council  of  Florence  (A.  D.  1439)  was  the  first 
ecclesiastical  body  that  authoritatively  declared  the 
sacraments  to  be  seven  in  number,  f  This  doctrine 
received  final  sanction,  at  a  later  date,  at  Trent.  At 
this  Council  of  Florence,  departed  saints  were,  for  the 
first  time,  authoritatively  declared  to  be  in  a  state  of 
beatitude;  and  therefore  now,  for  the  first  time,  accord- 
ing to  Romish  theory,  could  be  properly  and  lawfully 
invocated.  The  doctrine  can  not  be  proved  to  be 
of  anterior  date. J  Purgatory  now  first  received  the 
approval  of  a  conciliar  decree,  but  was  finally  confirmed 
at  the  Council  of  Trent,  wholly  upon  assumption,  and 
without  the  least  sanction  of  scriptural  proof  The 
decree  is  as  follows,  as  translated  from  the  Latin,  which 
is  before  us : 

In  the  name,  then,  of  the  H0I7  Trinity,  Father,  Son  and  Holy 
Grhost,  with  the  approbation  of  the  sacred  General  Council  of 
Florence,  we  decree  also  ["we"  does  not  embrace  Jesus  Christ  and 

*Ibid,  torn,  xiv.,  Concl.  Lat.  (A.  D.  1012),  Sess.  XI.,  A.  D.  1516. 
And  see  L'Hist.  de  la  Prag.  S.  et  Concordat,  par  Pithon. 

fDecretiim.  Concl.  Florent.  Lab.  Concilia,  torn,  xiii.,  col.  o34. 
Paris,  1672. 

JVeron's  "Rule  of  Catholic  Faith,"  p.  82.  Birmingham,  18o3  ; 
p.  I'i  from  Stapleton  ;  and  p.  99  from  the  Benedictine  editors  of 
Ambrose's  work. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


the  apostles — Author]  that  if  any  true  penitents  shall  depart 
this  life  in  the  love  of  God,  before  they  have  made  satisfaction,  by 
worthy  fruits  of  penance,  for  faults  of  commission  and  omission,  their 
souls  are  purified  after  death  by  the  pains  of  purgatory;  and  that  for 
their  release  from  their  pains,  the  suffrages  of  the  faithful  who  are 
alive  are  profitable  to  them,  to-wit:  the  sacrifices  of  masses,  prayers 
and  alms,  and  other  works  of  piety,  which,  according  to  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  Church,  are  wont  to  be  made  for  the  faithful  for  other 
'"believers.* 


*Labb.  Concl.,  torn,  xiii.,  p.  515.  Paris,  1671,  Sess.  XXV. 


TIfE  PAPAL  PRIMACY. 


We  may  here  affirm,  as  a  fact,  that  the  belief  in  A. 
D,  1 146  was  only  in  progression,  or  in  process  of 
'*  development"  ;  for  at  this  date  Otho  Frisigensis  refers 
to  the  belief  thus,  "  Some  do  affirm  that  there  is  a  place 
of  purgatory  after  death."*  The  dogma  was  not 
accepted  by  the  Greeks.  The  Primacy  of  the  bishop 
of  Rome  and  the  precedency  of  his  See  were  now  first 
defined  by  a  so-called  General  Council,  namely,  that  of 
Florence,  held  under  Eugenius  IV.  It  was  thus  defined 
at  the  tenth  session  : 

Also  we  decree  that  the  holy  Apostolical  See  and  the  Roman  Pontiff 
has  a  primacy  over  the  whole  world;  and  that  the  Roman  Pontitf  him- 
8eif  is  the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  the  prince  of  the  apostles,  and  is  the 
irue  vicar  of  Christ,  and  the  head  of  the  whole  Church,  and  the 
father  and  teacher  of  all  Cliristians;  and  that  to  him,  in  tlie  person  of 
the  blessed  Peter,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  has  committed  full  power  to 
feed,  rale  and  govern  the  universal  Church,  according  as  is  contained 
in  the  acts  of  the  General  Councils  and  in  the  holy  canons. f 

This  declaration  is  ranked  by  Benedict  XIV.,  in  his 
bull  dated  1742,  as  an  "article  of  Catholic  faith."!  The 
"acts  of  the  General  Council"  and  "holy  canons" 
above  referred  to  are  mere  inventions.    They  probably 

*Chron.,  lib.  viii.,  c.  26,  quoied  by  Jeremy  Taylor,  "  Dissuasive 
from  Popery,"  c.  i.,  s.  ix.,  Hebers  edition,  vol.  x.,  p.  149. 

fLab.  Concilia,  torn,  xiii.,  Concl.  Florent.,  Sess.  X.,  col.  154,  «t  seq. 
Paris,  1671. 

JBened.  XIV.,  Bullar,  torn,  i..  No.  T,  De  Dog.  et  Ritib.,  sec.  i.,  Fide 
Cathol.,  p.  345.    Mechlin,  1826. 

(384) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


relied  on  the  forged  "Decretal  Ei^istles "  which  had 
been  embodied  in  the  canon  law. 

The  Greek  Empire  was  now  drawing  near  its  fall. 
The  Emperor  Patseologus,  with  some  Greek  bishops, 
attended  the  council,  in  the  hope  of  obtaining  aid 
against  the  Turks,  and  were  weak  enough  to  be  pre- 
vailed on  to  subscribe  to  the  foregoing  decree.  But 
when  the  Greek  deputies  returned  to  Constantinople, 
the  Church  there  indignantly  rejected  all  that  had  been 
done  by  the  Greek  bishops  at  this  Council ;  and  in  a 
council  at  Constantinople,  held  about  eighteen  months 
after  the  termination  of  the  Council  of  Florence,  the 
decrees  of  that  council  were  declared  null,  and  the 
synod  itself  condemned.*  Gregory,  the  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  who  was  inclined  to  the  Latins,  was 
deposed,  and  Athanasius  chosen  in  his  stead.  The 
patriarchs  of  Alexandria,  Antioch,  Jerusalem  and  the 
chief  of  the  old  patriarchs  of  Ephesus,  Heraclea  and 
Caesarea,  were  all  present  at  this  latter  council,  and  all 
concurred  in  the  condemnation  of  the  decrees  of  the 
Florentine  Council. 

The  title,  "Mother  Church,"  was  not,  up  to  that 
time,  assumed.  Hitherto  the  title,  "  Vicar  of  Christ," 
was  a  common  appellation,  as  applied  to  bishops  gener- 
ally. The  Council  of  Florence  decreed  that  the  title 
should  be  given  to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  "reserving 
the  rights  of  the  bishop  of  Constantinople."  The  title, 
however,  as  every  intelligent  person  knows,  is  now 
assumed  and  appropriated  exclusively  by  the  Pope  of 
Rome. 

*Labb.  et  C088.  ConciL  Constan.,  Sess.  II.,  torn,  xiii.,  col.  1,367. 
Paris,  1672. 
26 


ROSARY  OF  THE  VIRGIN  MARY. 


Alane  de  Roche,  of  the  order  of  Jacobins,  inspired, 
as  he  said,  by  certain  visions,  invented  the  Rosary  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  subsequently  authoritatively  approved 
by  Sixtus  IV.  Mosheim,  however,  places  the  invention 
of  this  ecclesiastical  toy  at  an  earlier  date,  namely,  the 
tenth  century.  *  It  is  a  string  of  beads,  in  the  continual 
counting  of  which  the  mind  is  supposed  to  be  contem- 
plating divine  things.  The  same  prayer  is  repeated  a 
prescribed  number  of  times,  and  this  number  is  checked 
by  the  beads,  every  tenth  bead  being  a  large  one.  The 
word  rosary  means  remembrancer.  It  appears  to  be 
derived  from  the  Chaldee  rc,  "thought,"  and  shareb, 
"director."  The  idea,  as  well  as  the  thing  itself,  is 
manifestly  of  pagan  origin.  A  certain  number  of  pray- 
ers, it  is  supposed,  must  be  gone  through,  and  the 
beads  bring  the  number  in  remembrance.  A  string  of 
beads  for  the  same  purpose  was  used  by  the  ancient 
Mexicans,  t  It  is  common  among  the  Brahmins  and 
Hindoos.  I  In  Thibet  it  has  been  used  in  religious 
worship  from  time  immemorial.  Among  the  Tartars, 
the  rosary  of  one  hundred  and  eight  beads  has  become 
a  part  of  ceremonial  dress,  and  there  is  "  a  small  rosary 

♦Mosheim's  Eccl.  Hist.,  cent,  x.,  part  ii.,  c.  iv.,  8.  iii.  See  MabQ- 
lon,  Acta  Sanctor,  Ord.  Bened.,  p.  58,  etc. 

fSee  Humboldt's  "Mexican  Researches,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  20.  London, 
1814. 

JSee  Kennedy's  "Ancient  and  Hindoo  MTthology,"  toL  ii.,  p.  332. 
London,  1831.  (386) 


REFORMATORV  MOVEMENTS. 


of  eighteen  beads  of  inferior  size,  with  which  the 
Bouzes  count  their  prayers  and  ejaculations,  exactly  as 
in  the  Roman  ritual"  (Sir  John  F.  Davis,  "China," 
vol.  i.,  p.  391.    London,  1857). 

Such  was  the  accumulation  of  innovations  down  to 
this  period  of  time,  that  they  occupied  far  more  space  in 
the  apostate  Church  than  was  occupied  by  the  realities 
of  the  Bible  itself.  Indeed,  tradition  had  entirely  sup 
planted  the  Bible.  The  Bible  had  become  a  literary 
curiosity.  Superstition  and  dreams  and  ecstatics  occu- 
pied the  minds  of  the  people.  Priestcraft  was  the  craft 
of  the  age.  The  priests  managed  the  finances  of  the 
ignorant  masses,  and  subjected  them  to  absolute  penury, 
while  the  lustful  priests  themselves  lived  luxuriously 
upon  the  fat  of  the  land.  Like  modern  priests  and 
pastors,  the  priests  of  the  medieval  times  were  always 
engaged  in  inventing  something  new  that  was  entirely 
unknown  in  the  Word  of  God.  They  sought  after 
novelties,  first  to  please  the  people,  and  then,  having 
gained  their  confidence,  they  next  sought  to  enslave  the 
people. 

The  system  of  salvation  is  the  simplest  thing  in  the 
world  ;  and,  as  such,  it  was  intended  as  the  greatest 
blessing  to  the  world  ;  but  once  complicate  it  and  place 
it  beyond  the  grasp  of  the  common  mind,  and  you  at 
once  make  it  the  greatest  curse  of  the  world,  as  the 
darkest  ages  of  the  world  solemnly  attest.  That  people 
who  hold  to  and  live  upon  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel, 
will  live;  that  people  which  apostatize  from  the  simplic- 
ity of  the  gospel  will  utterly  fail  as  the  representatives 
of  the  truth. 


IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION. 


Pope  Sixtus  IV.  was  the  first  person  who  ordered  by 

decree  (A.  D.  1476)  the  solemnization  of  the  feast  of 
the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary  by  an 
office  or  service,  though  it  was  not  then  a  doctrine  of 
the  Church.  The  festival  of  the  Conception  of  the  Vir- 
gin Mary  was,  as  shown  in  a  previous  chapter,  intro- 
duced at  Lyons  about  the  year  1140,  but  was  opposed 
by  Bernard*  (now  a  canonized  saint  of  the  Church  of 
Rome)  as  a  novelty,  without  the  sanction  of  Scripture 
or  reason.  Bernard  said  that  it  was  a  "  false,  new,  vain 
and  superstitious  "  idea.  According  to  Fleury,  it  was 
John  Scott,  commonly  called  Duns  Scotus,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fourteenth  century,  who  seriously  broached 
the  doctrine  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  ! 

At  the  thirty  sixth  session  of  the  Council  of  Basle,  in 
A.  D.  1439  council,  by  the  way,  condemned  and 
rejected  by  the  Church  of  Rome),  it  was  declared  that 
the  doctrine  which  asserts  that  the  Virgin  Mary  was 
actually  subject  to  original  sin,  should  be  condemned; 
but  that  the  doctrine  that  she  was  always  free  from  all 
original  and  actual  sin,  and  both  holy  and  immaculate, 
should  be  approved,  and  should  be  held  and  embraced 
by  all  Catholics  as  being  pious  and  agreeable  to  all 
ecclesiastical  worship,  to  the  Romish  faith,  to  right 
reason  and  the  Scriptures,  and  that  it  should  not  be  law- 

*S  Bernard  Ep.  174,  torn,  i.,  col.  393.    Paris,  1839. 
fEccl.  Hist.,  torn,  xix.,  p.  150.    Paris,  1769. 

(388) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


ful  for  any  one  to  preach  or  teach  to  the  contrary.* 
The  festival  was  directed  to  be  celebrated  on  the  17th 
of  December.  The  Council  of  Avignon,  A.  D  1457, 
confirmed  the  act  of  the  Council  of  Basle,  and  forbade, 
under  pain  of  excommunication,  any  one  to  preach  any- 
thing contrary  to  the  doctrine,  f 

This  purely  speculative  doctrine,  and  of  no  practical 
utility  whatever  to  saint  or  sinner,  created  a  sore  divi- 
sion in  the  Church  of  Rome.  The  Dominicans,  follow- 
ing their  leader,  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  combated  the 
new  dogma  most  vehemently,  as  being  contrary  to  the 
Scriptures,  contrary  to  tradition,  and  contrary  to  the 
faith  of  the  Church;  while  at  the  same  time  it  was 
vigorously  supported  by  the  Franciscans.  "The  scan- 
dal became  so  great  at  each  returning  festival  day  that 
Sixtus  IV.  (A.  D.  1483)  issued  a  bull,  in  which,  of  his 
own  accord,  and  unsolicited,  he  condemned  those  who 
called  the  doctrine  a  heresy,  the  celebration  of  the  festi- 
val a  sin,  or  declared  that  those  who  held  the  doctrine 
were  guilty  of  mortal  sin,  and  subjected  those  to  excom- 
munication who  acted  contrary  to  this  decree."  By  the 
same  bull  he  enacted  the  like  penalty  against  those  who 
maintained  the  opponents  of  the  doctrine  to  be  in  heresy 
or  in  mortal  sin,  declaring,  as  a  reason,  that  "this  doc- 
trine had  not  yet  been  decided  by  the  Roman  Church 
and  the  Apostolic  See."  This  decree  is  found  in  the 
appendix  of  every  authorized  edition  of  the  Decrees  of 
the  Council  of  Trent.  Despite  this  Pope's  bull,  the  dis- 
cord continued,  to  the  great  scandal  of  pure  religion ; 
and  when  the  doctrine  of  "original  sin"  came  to  be 
argued  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  Dominicans  and 

*L»bb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  xii.,  cols.  G22-623.    Paris,  1671. 
fLabb.  et  Coss.,  torn,  xiii.,  col.  1,403.    Pari*,  1671. 


390 


IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION. 


Franciscans  ranged  themselves  on  opposite  sides  and 
refought  the  battle.  The  debate  became  so  warm  and 
excited,  that  the  Pope  ordered,  through  his  legates,  that 
the  Council  should  "not  meddle  in  this  matter,  which 
might  cause  a  schism  among  Catholics,  but  endeavor  to 
maintain  peace  between  the  contending  parties,  and  to 
seek  some  means  of  giving  them  equal  satisfaction  ;  but, 
above  all,  to  observe  the  brief  of  Pope  Sixtus  IV. ,  which 
prohibited  preachers  from  taxing  the  doctrine  [the 
Immaculate  Conception]  with  heresy."* 

The  Council  of  Trent  (A.  D.  1546)  expressly  excluded 
from  its  decree  on  "original  sin,"  the  Virgin  Mary; 
but  declared  "that  the  constitutions  of  Pope  Sixtus  IV., 
which  it  revives,  are  to  be  observed  under  the  penalties 
contained  in  those  constitutions."  Thus  both  parties 
claimed  the  victory.  The  theological  contest  raged  as 
violently  as  ever.  In  the  seventeenth  century  Spain  was 
thrown  into  the  utmost  confusion  by  these  painful  and 
puerile  disputes ;  and  an  attempt  was  made  to  bring 
them  to  a  close  by  an  appeal  to  the  supposed  infallible 
head  of  the  Church,  who  was  importuned  to  issue  his 
bull  to  determine  the  question.  "But  (observes  Mos- 
heim)  after  the  most  earnest  entreaties  and  importuni- 
ties, all  that  could  be  obtained  from  the  Pontifif  by  the 
Court  of  Spain  was  a  declaration  intimating  that  the 
opinion  of  the  Franciscans  had  a  high  degree  of  proba- 
bility on  its  side,  and  forbidding  the  Dominicans  to 
oppose  it  in  a  public  manner ;  but  this  declaration  was 
accompanied  by  another,  by  which  the  Franciscans  were 
prohibited  in  turn  from  treating  as  erroneous  the  doc- 
trine of  Dominicans,  "t 

*F.  Paul  Sarpi.  Hist.  Concl.  Trid.,  lib.  ii.,  c.  68.  Geneva,  1629, 
fMosbeim's  Ecci.  Hist.,  cent,  xrii.,  sec.  ii.,  part  i.,  c.  i.,  a.  48. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


391 


Alexander  VII.,  A.  D.  1661,  while  reviving  the  con- 
stitutions of  Sixtus  IV.,  vainly  endeavored  to  allay  the 
feud;  but  he  admitted  that  the  Church  had  not  decided 
the  vexed  question,  and  that  he  by  no  means  desired  or 
intended  to  decide  it.* 

Clement  XL  appointed  a  festival  in  honor  of  the 
Immaculate  Conception,  to  be  annually  celebrated  by 
the  Church  of  Rome ;  but  the  Dominicans  refused  to 
obey  this  law. 

Eventually  Pope  Pius  IX.  undertook  to  decide,  as  he 
conceived,  for  all  time,  the  much-vexed  question.  On 
the  2d  of  February,  1849,  issued  his  famous  "  Ency- 
clical Letter,"  addressed  to  all  "patriarchs,  primates, 
archbishops  and  bishops  of  the  whole  Catholic  world," 
exhorting  each  one  to  offer  up  prayers  in  his  diocese, 
beseeching  "of  the  merciful  Father  of  light  to  illumi- 
nate him  [the  Pope]  with  the  superior  brightness  of  his 
Divine  Spirit,  and  to  inspire  him  with  a  breath  from  on 
high,  and  that,  in  an  affair  of  such  great  importance,  he 
might  be  able  to  take  such  a  resolution  as  should  most 
contribute  as  well  to  the  glory  of  his  holy  name  as  to 
the  praise  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  the  profit  of  the 
Church  militant,"  and  desired  to  know  their  opinion  on 
the  subject.  On  the  24th  of  March  following,  the  Tab- 
let, a  prominent  Romish  journal,  announced  that  the 
Pope  was  about  to  give  a  definite  decision  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  "determine  a  question  which,  for  five  hundred 
years,  had  been  open,  and  for  a  portion  of  that  time 
hotly  debated  to  and  fro.  The  Franciscans  and  Domin- 
icans are  now  agreed,  and  the  whole  (Roman)  Catholic 


*Alex.  Sept.,  An.  Dora.  1661,  "Mag.  Bull  Romanum,"  torn,  ri.,  p. 
lo8.    Edit.  Luxumberghi,  1727. 


392  IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION. 

world  calls  for  a  definite  sentence  from  the  infallible 

judge." 

In  December,  1854,  the  Pope,  in  an  assembly  of 
bishops,  from  which  all  non-contents  were  excluded, 
issued  his  bull  declaring  the  doctrine  as  a  matter  of 
faith.*  "Let  no  man  (says  the  decree)  interfere  with 
this  our  declaration,  pronunciation  and  definition,  or 
oppose  or  contradict  it  with  presumptuous  rashness. 
If  any  should  presume  to  assail  it,  let  him  know  that  he 
will  incur  the  indignation  of  the  Omnipotent  God,  and 
of  his  blessed  apostles  Peter  and  Paul."  Hence  the 
Tablet  observed,  that  "whosoever  should  thenceforth 
deny  that  the  Blessed  Virgin  was  herself,  by  a  miracu- 
lous interposition  of  God's  providence,  conceived  with- 
out the  stain  of  original  sin,  is  to  be  condemned  as  a 
heretic." 

Such  is  a  brief  history  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Immacu- 
late Conception  ;  but  it  is  a  popular  fallacy  to  suppose 
that  it  is  a  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church.  The  Pope 
of  Rome,  according  to  the  orthodox  principles  of  that 
Church,  can  not  create  doctrines  of  faith  which  have  not 
emanated  from  a  general  council  of  the  Church. 

The  horrid  Inquisition  was  established  in  the  kingdom 
of  Castile  in  1478,  under  Ferdinand  and  Isabella.  We 
note  this  as  an  important  fact,  because  the  Inquisition 
was  an  annex  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  Fleury  expressly 
says  that  it  was  done  "  by  the  counsel  of  the  archbishop 
of  Seville,  and  by  the  authority  of  Pope  Sixtus  IV. "f 

The  beginning  of  the  institution  can  be  traced  to  an 
earlier  date.    At  the  Council  of  Verona,  A.  D.  1 1 84, 

*The  "Univers,"  Paris,  20th  January,  1855;  the  "Tablet,"  Loa- 
don,  27th  January,  18-35. 

tFleury,  Eccl.  Hist.  Cont.,  torn,  xxiii.,  p.  478.    Paris,  1769. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


393 


Pope  Lucius  III.  published  a  constitution  against 
alleged  heretics,  wherein  bishops  were  ordered,  by 
means  of  commissaries,  to  inform  themselves  of  persons 
suspected  of  heresy,  whether  by  common  report  or 
private  information.  Should  spiritual  terrors  be  of  no 
avail,  the  offender  was  to  be  handed  over  to  the  secular 
power,  in  order  that  temporal  punishment  might  be 
inflicted.* 

At  the  Council  of  Narbonne,  A.  D.  1235,!  a  series 
of  oppressive  and  cruel  regulations  against  alleged 
heretics  was  drawn  up  by  the  Pope's  command ;  and  at 
the  Council  of  Beziers,  A.  D.  1247,  the  preaching 
friars'  Inquisition,  for  the  provinces  of  Aix,  Aries  and 
Ebrum,  was  established  also  by  order  of  the  Pope. 
Forty-seven  articles  were  drawn  up,  which,  with  those 
passed  at  the  Council  of  Narbonne,  formed  the  founda- 
tion of  the  rules  afterward  adopted  by  the  Inquisition. | 

In  A.  D.  1495,  Alexander  VI.  assumed  a  new  power, 
namely,  that  of  granting  a  dispensation  to  marry  within 
a  prohibited  degree.  He  gave  a  dispensation  to  Ferdi- 
nand, the  King  of  Naples,  to  marry  his  own  niece,  who 
was  fourteen  years  of  age.  || 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn,  x.,  cols.  1,737  and  1,741.    Paris,  1671. 

flbid,  torn,  xi.,  col.  487. 

JLabb.  et  Coss.,  torn,  xi.,  col.  676. 

)|Fleury,  Cont.,  torn,  xxiv.,  p.  226.    Paris,  17d9. 


SALE  OF  INDULGENCES. 


In  the  years  A,  D.  15 15-17,  took  place  the  grand 
sale  of  indulgences  by  Pope  Leo  X.,  which,  as  every 
intelligent  reader  knows,  was  one  of  the  immediate 
causes  of  the  Reformation.  This  method  was  adopted 
to  replenish  his  coffers,  which  were  exhausted  by  his 
prodigality,  or  rather  by  his  extravagances ;  and  also  to 
complete  the  church  of  St.  Peter,  begun  by  Julius  II. 
Fleury  informs  us  that  Leo  granted  indulgences  on 
"such  easy  conditions,  that  men  could  hardly  care  at 
all  for  their  salvation  if  they  refused  to  gain  them."* 

The  order  of  the  Jesuits  was  founded  by  Ignatius 
Loyola  in  1540.  This  distinguished  servant  and  agent 
of  the  propaganda  de  fide  was  born  A.  D.  1491,  in  the 
province  of  Guipuscoa,  in  Spain.  He  was  educated  for 
the  army,  but  eventually  left  the  service  and  entered 
the  Church.  He  died  July,  1556.  The  order  was  con- 
firmed by  Paul  III.,  first  with  limitations,  and  subse- 
quently without  any  restrictions. 

Since  the  days  of  the  apostles  not  a  council  of  cardi- 
nals, not  a  convocation  of  clergymen,  not  a  general 
conference  of  bishops,  and  not  a  convention,  composed 
exclusively  of  preachers,  ever  assembled,  that  did  not 
concoct  mischief,  in  some  sense  contradict  the  word  of 
God,  and  pass  decrees  and  resolutions  more  or  less  con- 
tradictory to  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ.    Crafty  men 

*Flenry,  Conl.,  torn,  ixy.,  pp.  497,  498. 

(394) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


39S 


plot  and  plan  in  secret ;  they  buy  up  small  men  at  a 
small  price  to  serve  as  their  willing  dupes ;  they  pack 
their  committees  and  caucuses  in  advance ;  they  frame 
all  their  laws  of  expediency  in  advance,  and  prepare 
their  fallacies  and  casuistry  before  the  time  of  action ; 
they  promise  to  reward  their  bought-up  tools  with 
places  of  emolument  and  distinction.  In  all  their 
ambitious  plans  they  see  the  end  from  the  beginning. 
One  head  generally  rules  the  ecclesiastical  rookery. 
The  marks  of  his  shrewd  intellect  are  everywhere  visi- 
ble in  whatever  develops  in  the  convocation  or  in  the 
convention.  In  open  convention  the  law  of  expediency 
supplants  the  law  of  God ;  self-interest  takes  the  highest 
seat  in  the  synagogue,  and  the  majority  are  made 
subservient  to  the  pronouncements  of  the  ruling  spirit. 


COUNCIL  OF  TRENT  AND  TRADITION. 


The  Council  of  Trent  assembled  A.  D.  1545,  col- 
lected in  one  mass  all  former  errors  and  superstitions, 
and,  without  the  fear  of  God  before  their  eyes,  con- 
firmed them  by  conciliar  decree.  In  A.  D.  1546  tradi- 
tion was  first  placed  on  a  level  with  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
The  doctrine  is  essential  to  the  existence  of  the  Papal 
system,  for,  under  the  cloak  of  tradition,  all  her  inno- 
vations are  attempted  to  be  supported.  By  adopting 
tradition,  they  in  effect  declare  the  Word  of  God  to  be 
insufficient.  Without  tradition,  and  everything  that 
the  term  implies,  the  Roman  system  of  theology  would 
fall  to  pieces. 

Even  as  late  as  the  latter  part  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
an  eminent  cardinal  of  the  Roman  Church,  Gabriel 
Biel.  affirmed  that  "the  Scripture  alone  teaches  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation,"  and  instances  "in  the 
things  to  be  done  and  to  be  avoided,  to  be  loved  and  to 
be  despised,  to  be  believed  and  hoped  for."  "The 
will  of  God  is  to  be  understood  by  the  Scriptures,  and 
by  them  alone  we  know  the  whole  will  of  God."*  The 
apocryphal  books  were  for  the  first  time  authoritatively 
recognized  as  a  part  of  the  sacred  canon  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures. 

".^8  the  Church  is  evidently  more  ancient  than  the  Scriptures, 
so  the  Scriptures  were  not  authentic,  save  by  the  authority  of  the 
Church." — Eckii  Euchiridion  de  Ecclesia  et  ejw  Auctoritate,  etc.,  p.  21. 
Colonise,  1.567. 

*Lecton,  in  Canon  MissK,  fol.  cxlvi.,  p.  1,  col.  2.    Lugd.,  1511. 

(396) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


397 


Ttiis  subject  will  be  more  fully  elaborated  hereafter. 

In  June,  1546,  the  Council  of  Trent,  at  its  fourth 
session,  occupied  much  of  its  time  in  defining-  what 
was  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  on  the  subject  of  orig- 
inal  sin,  justification,  good   works   and    merit.  The 
various   opinions   held   by  members  of  the  Romish 
Church  up  to  this  date  render  it  certain  that  the  teach- 
ing, on  any  of  these  points,  was  not  fixed.    It  is  true 
that  the  priesthood,  from  sordid  and  corrupt  motives, 
had,  for  many  years,  preached  up  merit  and  good  works 
as  a  cause  of  salvation,  to  the  almost  entire  exclusion 
of  grace,  faith  and  obedience.    This  Council  conveyed 
its  opinion  under  different  heads,  embodied  in  sixteen 
chapters  and  thirty  three  decrees,  accompanied  by  as 
many  anathemas,  or  curses,  if  not  accepted.  These 
decrees,  however,  were  not  passed  without  considerable 
unseemly  and  unministerial  brawling.    The  Franciscans 
and  Dominicans  were,  as  usual,  at  daggers  drawn.  Two 
venerable  prelates  manifested  their  exuberant  zeal  in 
pressing  their  private  opinions,  by  coming  to  blows  and 
tugging  at  each  other's  beards;*  and  Charles  V.  threat- 
ened to  throw  them  into  the  Adige  if  they  would 
not   deport   themselves   in   a    more   becoming  man- 
ner.   The  opinions  being  so  various,  it  was  necessary 
to  frame  the  decrees  ambiguously;  and  so  completely 
had  the  Council  succeeded  in  mystifying  the  subject, 
that  no  sooner  had  the  Council  ended,  than  Dominic  a 
Soto,  who  took  a  leading  part  in  the  debates,  published 
a  book  on  justification,  which  was  answered  by  Andreas 
Vega,  who  had  opposed  his  views  in  the  Council ;  and 
each  claimed  the  authority  of  the  same  Council  in  sup- 

*Card.  Pallavicini's  Hist.  Concl.  Trid.,  torn,  i.,  p.  277.  Aug. 
Vind.,  1775. 


398 


COUNCIL  OF  TRENT  AND  TRADITION. 


port  of  his  particular  views.  These  discussions  and 
angry  debates  between  different  schismatic  parties, 
continued  in  the  Romish  Church  for  a  long  time  after 
the  closing  of  this  famous  Council.  It  may  be  safely 
asserted  that,  previous  to  June,  1546,  the  doctrine  on 
these  subjects  was  not  defined  by  the  Romish  Church. 
There  are,  however,  two  points  most  explicitly  defined 
by  this  Council.  First,  by  the  twenty-fourth  canon  on 
justification,  he  is  anathematized  who  says  that  good 
works  are  the  "  fruits  and  signs  of  justification  received, 
and  not  the  cause  of  its  increase."  And  second,  "If 
any  shall  say  that  the  good  works  of  a  justified  man  are 
in  such  sort  the  gifts  of  God  as  not  to  be  also  the  merit 
of  the  justified  person ;  or  that  the  justified  do  not 
really  merit  increase  of  grace  and  eternal  life,"  they  are 
equally  cursed.  It  was  a  great  scriptural  truth  uttered 
by  "  Saint"  Augustine  when  he  said  that  "  all  our  good 
merits  are  only  wrought  in  us  by  grace ;  and  when  God 
crowns  our  merits,  he  crowns  nothing  else  but  his  own 
gifts."*  So  repugnant,  however,  was  this  sentiment  to 
the  interests  of  a  sordid  and  corrupt  church,  that  the 
passage  was  ordered  to  be  expunged  from  his  works. f 
The  necessity  of  the  priest's  intention  to  give  validity 
to  a  sacrament  was  first  decreed  at  the  seventh  session 
of  the  Council  of  Trent  (Con.  Trid.,  Sess.  VII.,  Decre- 
tum  de  Sacramentis  in  Genere,  can.  xi.,  p.  77.  Paris, 
edit.  1848).  The  idea  was  invented  by  the  Council  of 
Trent,  but  it  formed  no  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  previous  to  this  date,  as  is  evident  by 

*Aug.  ad  Sextum,  Epist.  cv.,  torn.  ii.  Edit.  IJasil,  1529;  and  ale* 
p.  1,116,  torn,  iv.,  part  ii.    Paris,  1671. 

findex  Expurgatorious  jussu  Bernardi  de  Sandoval  «t  lloias. 
^adriti,  1612,  et  per  Turretin.    Genevse,  1618. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


399 


the  discussions  on  the  subject,  and  the  opposition  it 
received  when  proposed.  All  of  which  goes  to  show 
the  wickedness  of  unauthorized  councils,  and  the  greater 
wickedness  of  the  things  transacted  in  them.  The 
necessity  of  the  priest's  intention  to  give  validity  to  a 
sacrament,  was  a  notion  mentioned  in  the  decree  of 
Eugene  at  the  Council  of  Florence,  1439.*  It  is  certain 
that  for  twelve  hundred  years  no  trace  whatever  of  this 
doctrine  can  be  found  in  any  ecclesiastical  writer.  The 
original  introduction  is  attributed  to  the  extreme  igno- 
rance of  some  of  the  priests,  the  service  being  per- 
formed in  Latin,  a  language  they  did  not  understand; 
hence  their  unintentional  mutilation  of  the  text,  not 
understanding  the  words.  This  gave  rise  to  a  discussion 
among  school-men,  whether  a  priest  who  corrupts  the 
sacramental  words,  in  pronouncing  them,  celebrated  a 
valid  sacrament.  The  opinions  seemed  to  be  that, 
though  the  priest  knew  nothing  of  what  he  was  saying, 
yet  if  the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  did  was 
there,  it  was  sufficient.  This  appears  to  have  been  the 
reasoning  of  Pope  Zachary,  in  answer  to  Boniface,! 
about  the  ignorance  of  a  priest  in  Bavaria,  who  had 
baptized  in  nomine  Pairia,  Filia,  et  Spirittia  Sancta  \ 
Down  to  the  time  of  passing  the  decree  at  Trent 
(March,  1547),  declaring  the  intention  of  the  priest 
essentially  necessary,  it  appears  that  all  that  was 
required  was  that,  provided  the  intention  existed,  the 
sacrament  was  valid,  though  the  form  of  words  was 
incorrect.     It  is,  nevertheless,  a  fact  that  the  Church 

*Labb.  et  Coss.  Concl.,  torn.  liii.,  col.  535.    Paris,  1672. 
tAvent.  Annal.,  B.  1,  3,  p.  297.    Ingolst,  1554. 
JSee  "Gibson's  Preservatire, "  vol.  viii.,  p.  208,  rerised  edition. 
London,  1848. 


400 


COUNCIL  OF  TRENT  AND  TRADIIION. 


of  Rome  at  this  very  day  requires  that  the  form  should 
be  strictly  correct,  to  give  validity  to  the  so-called 
sacrament. 

The  seven  (so-called)  sacraments  were  confirmed,  as 
an  article  of  faith,  at  the  seventh  session  of  the  Council 
of  Trent.*  This  particular  number  was  first  advanced 
by  Peter  Lombard,  bishop  of  Paris,  in  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, as  a  private  opinion ;  which  private  opinion  in 
time  becomes  the  pivotal  point  of  a  new  creed,  and  the 
chrysalis  of  a  new  sect,  as  the  history  of  a  corrupt 
church  has  demonstrated  a  thousand  times.  In  1439 
the  Council  of  Florence  passed  a  decree  on  the  subject; 
but  this  is  denied  by  some  to  be  a  general  council,  and 
many  after  this  date  disputed  on  the  doctrine,  and  the 
matter  formed  the  subject  for  serious  debate,  disputes 
and  bickerings  at  the  seventh  session  of  the  Trent 
Council.  The  astute  doctors  of  theology  who  formed 
this  Council  sought  to  support  their  theory  from  anal- 
ogy. They  could  find  no  better  argument  for  their  new 
conceit  than  that  the  number  seven  was  a  mystical  num 
ber:  as  for  instance,  there  are  seven  virtues,  seven 
capital  vices,  seven  planets,  seven  defects  which  came 
from  original  sin;  the  Lord  rested  the  seventh  day; 
there  were  seven  plagues  in  Egypt,  seven  candlesticks, 
etc.;  and,  therefore,  you  see,  there  should  be  seven 
sacraments  ;t  but  Cardinal  Bellarmine,  perhaps,  gives  the 
most  conclusive  reason  why  we  should  adopt  this  num- 
ber, which  is,  that  the  Council  of  Trent  so  decreed  it.  I 

*Concl.  Trid.,  Sess.  VII.,  Decretum  de  Sacramentis,  can.  i.,  De 
.Sacramen.  et  Genere. 

fVide  Father  Paul  Sarpi's  ''  History  of  the  Council  of  Trent," 
lib.  iii.,  cap.  85,  vol.  i.,  p.  576.    London,  1736. 

JBelL,  De  Effect.  Sacr.,  lib.  ii.,  c.  25,  s.  4,  torn,  iii.,  p.  109.  Edit. 
Pnig.,  1721. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


401 


In  A.  D.  1 55 1  the  doctrine  of  attrition  was  defined. 
Gibson,  in  his  "Preservative  from  Popery,"  says  that 
Bishop  Canus  was  the  first*  that  broached  the  doctrine 
that  attrition,  joined  with  the  sacrament  of  penance,  is 
sufficient  to  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins.f  This  so-called 
sacrament  of  penance  is  stated  to  be  as  necessary  to 
salvation  to  those  who  have  sinned  after  baptism,  as 
baptism  itself  for  the  unregenerate  ;J  and  the  Trent 
Catechism  says:  "There  is  no  sin  however  grievous, 
no  crime  however  enormous,  or  however  frequently 
repeated,  which  penance  does  not  remit.  To  it  belongs 
in  so  special  a  manner  the  efficacy  of  remitting  actual 
guilt,  that,  without  its  intervention,  we  can  not  obtain 
or  hope  for  pardon.  "||  The  three  necessary  or  compo- 
nent parts  are  stated  to  be  contrition  (or  more  correctly, 
attrition),  confession,  and  absolution  and  satisfaction, 
which  are  the  component  elements  of  the  sacrament.  § 
It  is  modestly  admitted  that  contrition  alone  (that  is,  a 
sorrow  and  detestation  of  past  sin,  from  a  love  to  God, 
and  a  determination  to  sin  no  more),  without  confession, 
absolution  and  satisfaction,  but  with  a  desire  for  them, 
will  obtain  the  grace  and  the  pardon  of  God.  But 
imperfect  repentance  (attrition),  (that  is,  a  turning  from 
sin,  from  a  selfish  motive,  such  as  a  fear  of  punishment) 
will  not  alone  obtain  pardon  ;  but,  nevertheless,  when 
accompanied  by  confession,  and  absolution  and  satis- 
faction, it  will  obtain  grace  and  pardon  in  this  so-called 

*At  the  fourteenth  session  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  c.  iv. 
tGibson's  Preservative,  vol.  ii.,  tit.  viii.,  pp.  87,  38,  folio  edition. 
London, 1738. 

JConcl.  Trid.,  Sess.  XIV.,  cap.  ii.,  ad  fin. 

IIDonovan's  Translation,  pp.  260,  261.    Dublin,  1829.  Donovan 
was  a  professor  at  Maynooth  College. 
?Concl.  Trid.,  Sess.  XIV.,  cap.  3. 
27 


402  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT  AND  TRADITION. 

sacrament  of  penance.  That  is  to  say,  an  imperfect 
repentance  of  sin  in  this  so-called  sacrament  of  penance 
is  sufficient  to  obtain  pardon  of  sin  !*  Delahoguc 
plainly  lays  down  the  rule — "Perfect  repentance  is  not 
required  in  order  that  a  man  may  obtain  the  remission 
of  his  mortal  sins  in  the  sacrament  of  penance,  "f 

*See  Donovan's  Translation  as  above,  pp.  269,  270,  271,  and  Concl. 
Irid.,  Sess.  XIV.,  c.  4. 

tTract.  de  Sacr.  Poenit.    Dublin,  1825. 


MORTAL  SIN  AND  VENIAL  SIN. 


Did  the  apostles  ever  indulge  in  such  consummate 
nonsense  as  to  define  the  difference  between  "mortal 
sin"  (a  sin  for  which  there  is  no  forgiveness,  which 
penance  can  not  reach),  and  "venial  sin"  (a  sin  which 
penance  can  reach,  and  for  which  there  is  forgiveness)? 
Such  hair-splitting  of  undefinable  dogmas  may  well 
engage  the  attention  of  demented  scholastics,  and  as  a 
by-play  amuse  university  sophomores ;  but  men  of 
refined  intellects  and  of  clean  consciences  should  be 
ashamed  to  dally  with  such  metaphysical  jargon,  which, 
while  it  obscures  the  plain  teaching  of  God's  word, 
finally  deludes  and  damns  its  votaries. 

At  a  council  held  at  Edinburgh,  by  Archbishop 
Andrews,  in  1852,  it  was  declared  that  the  Lord's 
Prayer  might  be  said  to  the  saints.* 

In  1563  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  was  finally  con- 
firmed at  the  twenty-fifth  and  last  session  of  the  Council 
of  Trent.  This  Council  passed  on  matters  of  doctrine, 
fifteen  decrees,  forty-four  chapters,  and  one  hundred 
and  thirteen  canons;  and  it  enforced  these  doctrines  by 
one  hundred  and  twenty-five  anathemas!  This  Council 
also  was  occupied  on  internal  reformation.  On  this  head 
it  passed  one  hundred  and  forty-eight  chapters.  Its 
sittings  extended  over  eighteen  years.  The  first  session 
was  held  in  the  month  of  December,  1545,  and  the  last 


*Bi8hop  Skinner's  Eccl.  Hist.  Scot.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  39.    London,  1788. 

(403) 


404 


MORTAL  SIN  AND  VENIAL  SIN. 


in  December,  1563.  Until  this  date  (1564),  all  those 
who  purely  and  simply  subscribed  to  the  articles  of  the 
Nicene  Creed  were  declared  members  of  the  true 
Church,  inasmuch  as  no  new  creed  or  symbol  of  faith 
was  proposed  to  any  one  for  belief  as  a  test  of  his 
orthodoxy. 


PAPAL  USURPATIONS. 


We  are  not  yet  through  with  the  acts  of  the  Council 
of  Trent.  The  theological  doctors  of  this  Council, 
who  assumed  to  legislate  for  Jesus  Christ,  at  the  third 
session,  in  February,  1546,  ordained  "that  the  symbol 
of  faith  which  the  holy  Roman  Church  makes  use  of 
[the  Nicene  Creed],  as  being  that  principle  wherein  all 
who  profess  the  faith  of  Christ  must  necessarily  agree, 
and  that  firm  and  only  foundation  against  which  the 
gates  of  hell  shall  never  prevail,  be  expressed  in  the 
very  same  words  in  which  it  is  read  in  all  the  churches." 
From  after  the  9th  of  December  of  this  year  (A.  D. 
1564)  Pope  Pius  IV.,  by  virtue  of  his  alleged  apostolic 
authority,  and  according  to  a  resolution  of  the  Trent 
Council,  set  forth  and  published  a  confession  of  faith  to 
be  received  everywhere  under  penalties  enacted  by  the 
same  unauthorized  and  unscriptural  Council.  This  new 
confession  of  faith  consisted  of  the  "symbol  of  faith" 
just  referred  to,  with  the  addition  of  twelve  more  arti- 
cles. From  the  last-mentioned  date,  therefore,  a  new 
creed  was,  for  the  first  time,  imposed  upon  the  Christian 
world,  to  be  accepted  without  a  demur,  or  to  be  rejected 
under  pain  of  Papal  maledictions.  This  creed  embraces, 
in  a  few  words,  a  large  part  of  what  has  gone  before ; 
but  the  following  are  additional  articles  of  the  new  faith, 
then,  for  the  first  time,  introduced  by  this  creed  [we 
shall  give  the  Bull  of  Pope  Pius  IV.  presently]: 

I.  Not  only  apostolic  and  ecclesiastical  traditions  are 

(405) 


4o6 


PAPAL  USURPATIONS. 


to  be  most  steadfastly  admitted  and  embraced,  but  also 
"all  other  observances  and  constitutions"  of  the 
Romish  Church. 

2.  At  the  fourth  session  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  it 
was  decreed  that  no  one  should  dare,  in  matters  of  faith 
and  morals,  to  interpret  the  Scriptures  contrary  to  the 
sense  which  the  Church  hath  held  or  doth  hold.*  Pro- 
fessors of  the  Christian  religion  were  now,  for  the  first 
time,  compelled  to  admit  the  Holy  Scriptures  according 
to  that  sense  only  which  the  Church  has  held  or  does 
hold — a  notable  difference;  for  previous  to  this  date. 
Christians  might  reject  the  interpretation  of  the  Church, 
but  they  were  not  allowed  to  advance  an  interpretation 
of  the  Scriptures  contrary  to  the  sense  of  the  Church. 

3.  And  so,  at  the  same  session,  no  person  was 
allowed  to  advance  an  interpretation  of  Scripture  con- 
trary to  the  unanimous  agreement  of  the  Fathers."! 
But  now,  for  the  first  time,  no  Christian  was  permitted 
to  understand  or  interpret  the  Scriptures,  except  accord- 
ing to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers.  That  is, 
no  interpretation  must  be  given  unless  the  Fathers  are 
unanimous  on  that  interpretation.  Here,  now,  by  the 
authority  of  a  great  human  council,  the  decrees  and 
traditions  of  uninspired  men  are  made  to  supersede  the 
teaching  of  the  inspired  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ. 

4.  And  now,  for  the  first  time,  all  Christians  were 
to  receive  and  admit,  as  an  article  of  faith,  "all  the 

*"  Contra  eum  sensum,  quern  tenuit  et  tenet  sancLa  mater  eccle- 
sia."  Sess.  IV.,  Decret.  de  Edit,  et  usu  sacr.  librorum,  "Juxto  eum 
sensum,"  etc.    Bulla  super  forma  jura.    Prof,  fidel,  Pii  IV. 

t "  Contra  unanimem  consensum  Patrum,"  Session  IV.  Ibid  et 
Sic  Synodus  in  Trullo,  c.  xix.,  quam  putant  Constant.,  vi.,  c.  Exiit. 
circa  fin,  de  ver,  Sig.  in  6 — "Nisi  juxta  unanimem,  etc.,"  Bull», 
etc.,  Pii  IV. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  407 

received  and  approved  ceremonies  of  the  Church  in  the 
solemn  administration "  of  all  the  seven  sacraments, 
"and  all  other  things  delivered  and  defined  by  the 
sacred  canons  and  ecumenical  councils;"  thus  forming 
the  entire  code  of  decrees  of  councils,  including  cere- 
monies, into  articles  of  faith. 


THE  POPE  SUPREME  BISHOP. 


While  for  many  centuries  the  Pope  of  Rome  arro- 
gated to  himself  the  title  of  "Supreme  Bishop,"  all 
were  now  required,  by  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent, 
as  an  article  of  faith,  to  recognize  the  Church  of  Rome 
"as  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches,"  and  to 
"promise  obedience  to  the  Pope  as  successor  of  St. 
Peter  and  vicar  of  Christ!  "  In  this  connection  we  wish 
to  quote  from  Home's  Popery  Delineated  (London,  1848, 
pp.  211,  212): 

The  mother  church  was  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  which  was  in 
existence  long  before  the  Church  at  Rome  had  any  being.  At  Jeru- 
salem Jesus  Christ  himself  preached  :  there  the  apostles  first  planted 
Christianity  (Acts  i.  4,  A.  D.  33);  and  thence  was  the  gospel  sent 
forth  to  be  preached  to  all  nations  (Luke  xxiv.  47).  Therefore  not 
Rome,  but  Jerusalem,  should  claim  the  presidency  and  be  "  the 
mother  of  all  churches."  The  church  at  Samaria  was  founded  next 
to  the  church  at  Jerusalem  (Acts  viii.,  A.  D.  34);  and  then  the 
churches  at  Cyprus  and  Phenice,  and  at  Antioch,  by  those  Christian* 
which  were  dispersed  in  consequence  of  the  persecution  which  fol- 
lowed the  martyrdom  of  St.  Stephen  (Acts  xi.  19-21).  In  short,  not 
a  single  writer  ever  affirmed  that  "Rome  is  the  mother  of  all 
churches."  On  the  contrary,  the  majority  of  the  bishops  who  con- 
Tcned  at  the  Second  General  Council  of  Constantinople  expressly  gave 
the  appellation  to  J erusalem,  in  their  letter  to  Damasus,  bishop  of  the 
church  in  Jerusalem,  "which  is  the  mother  of  all  the  churches." 

We  have  now  seen  that  the  masterpiece  of  Roman 
craft  and  priestly  invention  was  consummated  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  1564,  at  the  Council  of  Trent. 
While  the  apostles  were  yet  living,  the  evil  leaven  had 
begun  to  work.    Paul,  writing  to  the  Thessalonians, 

(408) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


409 


warned  them  that  "the  day  of  Christ  shall  not  come, 
except  there  come  a  falling  away  first,  and  that  man  of 
sin  be  revealed,  the  son  of  perdition  ;  who  opposes  and 
exalts  himself  above  all  that  is  called  God,  or  that  is 
worshiped  ;  so  that  he,  as  God,  sits  in  the  temple  of 
God,  showing  himself  that  he  is  God."  And  he  adds, 
"For  the  mystery  of  iniquity  doth  already  work."  In 
another  epistle  he  gives  as  signs  of  the  coming  apostasy, 
"  forbidding  to  marry,  and  commanding  to  abstain  from 
meats,  which  God  hath  created  to  be  received  with 
thanksgiving." 

From  what  we  have  written,  it  is  seen  how  fully  these 
prophetic  warnings  have  been  verified  in  the  history  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  and  how  necessary  it  is  to  heed 
these  expressive  words:  "Come  out  of  her,  my  people, 
that  you  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins,  and  that  you 
receive  not  of  her  plagues." 

Since  1870,  when  Pope  Pius  IX.  promulgated  the 
monstrous  doctrine  of  Papal  infallibility,  which  was  the 
climax  of  all  human  assumption  and  presumption,  there 
has  been  a  ces.sation  of  innovations  by  that  hierarchy 
upon  the  spiritual  dominion  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 
Indeed,  in  the  promulgation  of  that  hideous  doctrine. 
Rome's  ambition  hath  overleaped  itself.  It  seemed 
utterly  impossible  for  the  Papacy  to  make  further 
encroachments  upon  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
upon  the  personal  liberties  of  mankind.  Her  political 
power  has  been  waning  ever  since.  By  that  act  she 
forfeited  the  respect  of  the  entire  civilized  world. 
Though  baffled  by  all  modern  political  governments, 
she  still  seeks,  through  other  channels,  universal  empire. 
Thwarted  in  her  reaches  for  political  power,  and  dis- 
mayed by  the  enlightenment   and   liberation  of  the 


THE  POPE  SUPREME  BISHOP. 


masses  in  all  nations,  she  plays  the  fawning  sycophant 
before  governors  and  princes  and  presidents,  with  a  view 
of  retaining  her  power  and  securing  still  greater  advan- 
tage. True  to  her  original  and  natural  instincts,  though 
.she  does  not  change  her  principles,  she  changes  her 
plans  of  attack,  modifies  her  manners  and  modes  of  pro- 
cedure, and  adapts  herself  to  all  changing  circumstances, 
whether  religious,  political,  social  or  educational. 

It  is  astonishing  to  observe  what  a  hold  tradition  has 
upon  the  religious  world.  With  all  our  Bibles,  and 
with  all  our  commentaries  upon  the  Bible,  and  with  a 
copious  distribution  of  the  Bible  in  all  lands,  a  much 
larger  portion  of  the  human  family  seem  to  be  under 
the  influence  of  tradition  than  under  the  influence  of  the 
Bible.  Of  course  this  remark  does  not  apply  to  the 
countries  where  the  Bible  is  not  known. 

The  Council  of  Trent,  by  the  first  decree  at  its  fourth 
session — having  stated  that  "having  constantly  in  view 
the  removal  of  error  and  the  preservation  of  the  purity 
of  the  gospel  in  the  Church,  which  gospel,  promised 
before  by  the  prophets  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  was 
first  orally  published  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God,  who  afterward  commanded  it  to  be  preached 
by  his  apostles  to  every  creature,  as  the  source  of  all 
saving  truth  and  discipline" — declared  "that  this  truth 
and  discipline  are  contained  both  in  written  books  and 
in  unwritten  traditions,  which  have  come  down  to  us 
cither  received  by  the  apostles  from  the  lips  of  Christ 
himself,  or  transmitted  by  the  hands  of  the  same  apos- 
tles, under  the  dictation  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  It  further 
declared  that,  "following  the  example  of  the  orthodox 
Fathers,  the  Council  doth  receive  and  reverence,  with 
equal  sentiments  of  piety  and  veneration,  all  the  books 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


411 


t.^  well  of  the  Old  as  of  the  New  Testament ;  and  also 
the  aforesaid  traditions,  pertaining  both  to  faith  and 
manners,  whether  received  from  Christ  himself  or  dic- 
tated by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  preserved  in  the  Catholic 
Church  by  continual  succession."  And  it  is  important 
to  observe  that,  "lest  any  doubt  should  arise  respecting 
the  sacred  books  which  are  received  by  the  Council,"  it 
"judged  proper"  to  send  out  a  list  of  such  books,  but 
it  does  not  set  out  what  are  the  points  of  faith  handed 
down  by  "  continual  succession,"  as  forming  the  unwrit- 
ten tradition.  The  object  of  this  omission  is  apparent; 
for  what  can  not  be  proved  by  Scripture  finds  shelter 
under  the  dark  and  mystic  mantle  of  tradition. 

As  the  Roman  bishop,  Canus,  ingeniously  observed, 
"Tradition  is  not  only  of  greater  force  than  the  Scrip- 
tures, but  almost  all  disputations  with  heretics  are  to  be 
referred  to  traditions.'"*  The  all-importance  of  traditions 
to  the  Romish  Church  is  summed  up  in  the  following 
passage  from  a  work  of  a  popular  writer  of  his  day, 
Costerus.  Expatiating  on  the  excellence  and  import- 
ance of  tradition,  he  says: 

The  excellency  of  the  unwritten  word  doth  far  surpass  the  Scripture, 
which  the  apostles  left  us  in  parchments ;  the  one  is  written  by  the 
finger  of  God,  the  other  by  the  pen  of  apostles.  The  Scripture  is  a 
dead  letter,  written  on  paper  or  parchment,  which  may  be  razed  or 
wrested  at  pleasure  ;  but  tradition  is  written  in  men's  hearts,  wliich 
can  not  be  altered.  The  Scripture  is  like  a  scabbard  that  will  receive 
any  sword,  either  leaden,  or  wooden,  or  brazen,  and  suffereth  itself 
to  be  drawn  by  any  interpretation.  Tradition  retains  the  true  sword 
in  the  scabbard  ;  that  is,  the  true  sense  of  the  Scripture  in  the  sheath 
of  the  letter.  The  Scriptures  do  not  contain  clearly  all  the  mysteries 
of  religion,  for  they  were  not  given  to  that  end  to  prescribe  an  abso- 
lute form  of  faith;  but  tradition  contains  in  it  all  truth,  it  comprehends 
all  the  mysteries  of  faith,  and  all  the  estate  of  the  Christian  religion, 

*Mel.  Canus  Loc.  Theol.  ■''>,  cap.  iii.,  p.  I06.    Colon,  1605. 


412 


THE  POPE  SUPREME  BISHOP. 


and  resolves  all  doubts  which  may  arise  concerning  faith  ;  and  from 
hence  it  will  follow  that  tradition  is  the  interpreter  of  all  Scriptures, 
the  judge  of  all  controversies,  the  remover  of  all  errors,  and  from 
whose  judgment  we  ouglit  nut  to  appeal  to  any  other  judge ;  yeg, 
rather,  all  judges  are  liouud  to  regard  and  follow  this  judgment.* 

We,  as  a  reformatorj-  people,  far  excellence,  have,  in 
times  past,  made  proclamation  to  the  world  that  we 
reject  all  traditions,  that  we  accept  only  the  words  of 
life  as  recorded  by  the  eight  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  that  we  propose  to  clear  the  Church  of  God 
of  all  innovations ;  but  let  the  reader  look  around  and 
see  how  the  congregations  are  pestered  with  the  tradi- 
tion of  men's  hearts,  and  how  impiously  they  have  laid 
aside  the  word  of  God  for  the  expediencies  and  inven- 
tions of  men.  See  how  pagan  classics  have  been  substi- 
tuted for  the  Scriptures,  how  the  pulpit  has  been  pagan- 
ized, the  Sunday-school  secularized,  and  the  worship 
of  God  corrupted.    It  is  not  necessar>'  to  give  details. 

*Cosier.  Eucharist,  cap.  i.,  p.  44.  Colon,  1605.  Quoted  by  Sir  H. 
Lynd,  Via  Devia,  sec.  viii. 


BULL  OF  POPE  PIUS  IV. 


Here  is  the  Bull  of  Pope  Pius  IV.,  which  we  prom- 
ised to  reproduce : 

BULL  OF  POPE  PIUS  IV. 

TOUCHING  THE  FOEM  OF  THE  OATH  OF   THE  PROFESSION  OF  FAITH. 

Phts,  Bishop,  Servant  of  the  servants  of  God,  for  the 
perpetual  memory  hereof. 
The  office  of  apostolic  servitude  enjoined  on  us  requires  that  those 
matters  which  Almighty  God  has  vouchsafed  divinely  to  inspire  into 
the  minds  of  the  holy  fathers  assembled  in  his  name  for  the  provident 
guidance  of  his  Church,  we  should  hasten  unhesitatingly  to  execute, 
unto  his  praise  and  glory.  Whereas,  therefore,  according  to  the  reso- 
lution of  the  Council  of  Trent,  all  who  may  happen  henceforward  to 
be  placed  over  cathedral  and  superior  churches,  or  who  may  have  to 
take  care  respecting  their  dignities,  canonries,  and  any  other  ecclesias- 
tical benefices  soever  having  the  care  of  souls,  are  bound  to  make  a 
public  profession  of  the  orthodox  faiih;  and  to  promise  and  swear  that 
they  will  continue  in  obedience  to  the  Churcii  of  Rome  ;  we,  willing 
that  the  same  thing  be  observed  likewise  by  all  persons  soever,  who 
shall  have  the  charge  of  monasteries,  convents,  houses,  and  any  other 
places  soever,  of  all  regular  orders  soever,  and  besides,  to  the  end  that 
the  profession  of  one  and  the  same  faith  be  uniformly  exhibited  by  all, 
and  that  one  only,  and  a  certain  form  of  it,  made  known  unto  all. 
We  (willing),  that  a  want  of  our  solicitude  should  by  no  means  be  felt 
by  any  one  in  this  particular,  by  strictly  prescribing  the  tenor  of  those 
presents,  we,  by  virtue  of  our  apostolic  authority,  command  that  the 
form  itself  be  published,  and  be  received  and  observed  everywhere  by 
those  whom  it  concerns,  in  consequence  of  the  decrees  of  the  Council 
itself,  as  well  as  the  other  particulars  aforesaid,  and  that  the  aforesaid 
profession  be  made  solemnly  according  to  this,  and  no  other  form, 
under  the  penalties  enacted  by  the  Council  itself  against  all  contraven-' 
ing,  under  the  following  terms  : 

(413) 


414 


BULL  OF  POPE  PIUS  IV. 


I.,  N.,  believe  and  profess,  with  a  firm  faith,  all  and  every  one  of 
the  things  which  are  contained  in  the  symbol  of  faith  which  is  used  in 
the  Holy  Roman  Church,  namely  : 

1.  I  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  maker  of  lua.vtii  and 
earth,  etc.    [The  Nicene  Creed]. 

2.  I  moet  firmly  admit  and  embrace  apostolical  and  ecclesiastical 
traditions,  and  all  other  constitutions  and  observances  of  the  same 
Church. 

3.  I  also  admit  the  Sacred  Scriptures  according  to  the  sense  which 
the  Holy  Mother  Church  has  held,  and  does  hold,  to  whom  it  belongs 
to  judge  of  the  true  sense  and  interpretation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures ; 
nor  will  I  ever  take  or  interpret  them  otherwise  than  according  to  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers. 

4.  I  profecs,  also,  that  there  are  truly  and  properly  seven  sacra- 
ments of  the  new  law,  instituted  by  .Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  and  for  the 
salvation  of  mankind,  though  all  are  not  necessary  for  every  one; 
namely,  baptism,  confirmation,  penance,  extreme  unction,  orders  and 
matrimony  ;  and,  that  they  confer  grace  ;  and  of  these,  baptism,  cou- 
firmatioQ  and  orders  can  not  be  reiterated  without  sacrilege. 

5.  I  receive  and  admit  the  ceremonies  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
received  and  approved  in  the  solemn  administration  of  all  the  above- 
said  sa-jraments. 

ti.  I  reoeive  and  embrace  all  and  every  one  of  the  things  which  have 
been  defined  in  the  holy  Council  <yf  Trent  concerning  original  sin  and 
justific.ilion 

7.  I  [irofess,  likewise,  that  in  the  mass  is  offered  to  the  true  God, 
proper  and  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  the  living  and  the  dead  ;  and  that 
in  the  most  holy  sacrifice  of  the  eucharist  there  is  really,  truly  and 
substantially  the  body  and  blood,  together  with  the  soul  and  divinity, 
of  oui-  Lard  Jesus  Christ;  and  there  is  made  a  conversion  of  the  whole 
substiince  of  the  bread  into  the  body,  and  of  the  whole  substance  of 
the  wine  into  the  blood,  which  conversion  the  Church  calls  transub- 
stantiation. 

8.  I  confer,  also,  that  under  either  kind  alone,  whole  and  entire, 
Christ  and  a  true  sacrament  are  received. 

9.  I  constantly  hold  that  there  is  a  purgatory,  and  that  the  sousl 
detained  tliere  are  helped  by  the  suffrages  of  the  faithful 

10.  Likewise  that  the  saints  reigning  together  with  Christ  are  to  be 
honored  and  invocated  with  Christ  ;  that  they  offer  jirayers  to  God  for 
us.  and  that  their  relics  are  to  be  venerated. 

11.  I  most  firmly  assert  that  the  images  of  Christ  and  of  the  Mother 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


of  God  ever  Virgin,  and  also  of  the  other  saints,  are  to  be  had  and 
retained,  and  that  due  honor  and  veneration  are  to  be  given  them. 

12.  1  also  affirm  that  the  power  of  indulgences  was  left  by  Christ  in 
the  Church,  and  that  the  use  of  them  is  most  wholesome  to  Christian 
people. 

13.  I  acknowledge  the  Holy  Catholic  and  Apostolical  and  Roman 
Church,  the  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  churches,  and  I  promise  and 

,  swear  true  obedience  to  the  Roman  bishoj),  the  successor  of  St.  Peter, 
the  prince  of  the  apostles  and  the  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ. 

14.  I  also  profess  and  undoubtedly  receive  all  other  things  deliv- 
ered, defined  and  declared  by  the  sacred  canon  and  general  councils, 
and  particularly  by  the  Council  of  Trent  ;  and  likewise.  I  also  con- 
demn, reject  and  anathematize  all  things  contrary  thereto,  and  all 
heresies  whatsoever,  condemned,  rejected  and  anathematized  by  the 
Church. 

15.  This  true  Catholic  faith,  out  of  which  no  one  can  be  saved, 
which  I  now  freely  profess,  and  truly  hold,  I,  N.,  promise,  vow  and 
swear  most  constantly  to  hold  and  profess  the  same,  whole  and  entire, 
with  God's  assistance,  to  the  end  of  my  life  ;  and  to  procure,  as  far  as 
lies  in  my  power,  that  the  same  shall  be  held,  taught  and  preached  by  all  who 
are  rmder  me,  or  are  entrusted  to  my  care  by  virtue  of  my  office.  So  help  via 
God  and  these  Holy  Gospeh  of  God. 

The  foregoing  is  the  translation  by  Charles  Butler, 
Esq.,  an  eminent  Roman  Catholic  layman,  in  his  work 
on  "The  Roman  Catholic  Church,"  London,  1825, 
except  those  parts  in  italics,  which  he  has  thought 
proper  to  omit,  and  we,  therefore,  give  this  last  clause 
(15)  from  the  original: 

15.  Hanc  veram  Catholicam  fidcm,  extra  quam  nemo  salvus  esse 
potest,  quam  in  prsesenti  sponte  profiteor,  et  veraciter  teneo,  eandem 
integram,  et  inviolatam,  usque  ad  extremum  vitae  spiritum  constantis- 
sime  (Deo  adjuvante)  retinere  et  confiteri,  atque  a  meis  subditis,  vel 
illis  quorum  cura  ad  me  in  munere  meo  spectabit,  teneri,  doceri  et 
praedicari,  quantum  in  me  erit  curaturum,  ego  idem  N.  spondeo, 
voveo,  ac  jaro.  Sic  me  Deus  adju>ret,  et  haec  sancta  Dei  evangelia. — 
Condi.  Trid.  apwl  BtUlas,  p.  381,  et  'teq.    Romoe,  1564. 

This  is  the  solemn  and  binding  oath  which  every 
Roman  Catholic  bishop  is  obliged  to  take  on  entering 


4i6 


BULL  OF  POPE  PIUS  IV. 


his  priestly  office.  This  oath  is  an  emanation  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  which  in  essence  is  more  political  than 
religious,  and  which  in  intention  partakes  more  of  that 
which  is  earthly  than  that  which  is  heavenly.  It  is  a 
pure  invention  of  a  demoniacal  spirit — a  soul-devouring 
spirit  —  and  utterly  without  the  least  semblance  of 
authority  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Witness  the  impu- 
dence and  audacity  of  men — frail  worms  of  the  dust — 
who  command  obedience  to  the  Pope  of  Rome  "by 
virtue  of  our  apostolic  authority  !  "  Not  a  word  is  said 
about  "the  Holy  Roman  Church"  in  New  Testament 
history,  and  what,  in  this  sacrilegious  oath,  are  called 
"ecclesiastical  traditions,"  "constitutions  and  obser- 
vances," are  but  the  creations  of  designing  and  mis- 
chievous men — the  bold,  .shameless  assumptions  of  a 
politico-religious  hierarchy.  It  will  be  noticed  that  in 
this  oath  "traditions"  take  precedence  to  the  "Sacred 
Scriptures,"  for  he  who  takes  the  oath  is  obliged  to  say, 
"I  also  admit  the  Sacred  Scriptures  according  to  the 
sense  which  the  Holy  Mother  Church  has  held,  and 
does  hold,"  etc.  In  item  "3"  "  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  Fathers"  (meaning  such  uninspired  men  as  Ter- 
tullian,  Origen,  Justin  Martyr,  Theophilus,  Irenaeus, 
Cyprian,  Clement,  et  al.)  is  placed  above  the  words  of 
Jesus  Christ  and  the  preaching  of  the  apostles. 

The  fact  is,  the  Church  of  Rome  is  chiefly  constituted 
of  pagan  notions,  of  imaginations,  of  Jewish  ritualism, 
and  of  unsupported  assumptions.  It  is  a  system  of 
innovations  upon  the  divine  ph^n.  This  blasphemous 
oath  contains  five  more  "sacraments"  than  are  found 
in  the  primitive  Church  which  was  established  by  the 
apostles  of  the  Lamb.  Neither  the  so-called  sacrament 
of  "confirmation,"  nor  the  sacrament  of  "penance," 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


nor  the  sacrament  of  "  extreme  unction,"  nor  the  sacra- 
ment of  "orders,"  nor  the  sacrament  of  "matrimony," 
is  found  in  apostoHc  teachins;^  and  apostoHc  practice. 
Nor  are  such  monstrous  doctrines  as  mass,  purgatory, 
image  worship  and  indulgences  found  in  the  word  of 
God,  as  we  have  clearly  shown  in  this  series  of  essays. 
The  bishop  who  affirms  what  is  contained  in  item  "12" 
must  know  that  he  is  swearing  to  a  lie.  The  Church 
which  the  Council  of  Trent  created,  is,  in  item  "  13," 
called  "the  Holy  Catholic,  Apostolical  and  Roman 
Church,  the  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  churches,"  "  out 
of  which  no  one  can  be  saved! "  Everything  that  does 
not  come  forth  from  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  bishop  or 
cardinal  is  sworn  to  "condemn,  reject  and  anathema- 
tize." Even  the  Word  of  God,  if  it  in  any  way  or  in 
any  sense  conflicts  with  the  pronouncements  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  must  be  condemned  and  rejected ! 
And  the  Pope  of  Rome,  and  the  cardinals,  and  all  the 
bishops,  and  all  the  priests,  exult  in  the  fact  that  two 
hundred  million  souls  are  serving  blindly  under  this 
baneful  and  deadening  influence. 


PRIVATE  INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  SCRIP- 
TURES PROHIBITED. 


In  these  times  of  loose  scriptural  interpretation,  when 
even  Protestants  and  Christians  place  tradition  upon  a 
level  with  the  written  authenticated  Word  of  God,  and 
when  the  law  of  expediency  is  made  to  take  the  same 
rank  with  the  law  of  the  New  Testament,  it  seems 
almost  impossible  to  confine  even  avowed  Christians 
within  the  domain  of  revealed  truth.  There  is  a  con- 
stant disposition  to  break  over  the  ramparts  of  truth 
which  God  has  miraculously  revealed.  Even  by  theolo- 
gians, so  called,  and  by  teachers  of  the  Christian  religion 
in  our  colleges,  Christianity  is  regarded  as  a  sort  of 
progressive  evolution,  having  a  starting  point  in  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  and  gradually  developing  down  to 
the  present  point  of  time.  Let  us  now  see  how  the 
Romish  Church  interprets  the  Scriptures,  and  then  we 
may  not  wonder  why  Protestants,  in  many  things,  fol- 
low in  the  wide  wake  of  Rome. 

In  November,  1564,  for  the  first  time,  the  subjects  of 
the  Papal  hierarchy  were  practically  precluded  from  all 
personal  liberty  in  examining  and  interpreting  the  Scrip- 
tures.* By  the  third  article  of  the  Creed  of  Pope  Pius 
IV.,  the  high  functionaries  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 
' '  promise,  vow  and  swear  constantly  to  hold  and  pro- 
fess "  as  follows  : 


*The  Council  of  Toulouse,  A.  D.  1229,  and  that  of  Oxford,  1408, 
prohibited  the  use  of  vernacular  translations  ;  but  these  were  proTin- 
cial  ooiincilg.  (4'8) 


R  E FO  R  M  ATO  R  V  MOVE  M  ENTS . 


419 


I  also  admit  the  Scriptures,  according  to  the  sense  which  the  Holy 
Mother  Church  has  held,  and  does  hold,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  judge 
the  true  evnee  and  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  ;  nor  will  I  ever 
take  and  iiiterjiret  th'"ra  otherwise  than  according  to  the  unanimou.-i 
consent  of  the  Fathers. 

The  above  is  the  translation  of  the  eminent  Roman 
Catholic  layman,  Charles  Butler,  Esq.  In  his  book 
entitled  "Book  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,"*  he 
.says  that  the  creed,  from  which  the  above  is  extracted, 
"was  received  throughout  the  Universal  Church,  and 
has  ever  [since  its  publication]  been  considered,  in  every 
l^art  of  the  world,  as  an  accurate  and  explicit  summary 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  faith.  Non  Catholics,  on  their 
admission  into  the  Catholic  Church,  publicly  repeat  and 
testify  their  assent  to  it,  without  restriction  or  reserva- 
tion." And  Dr.  Milner,  in  his  work  called  "End  of 
Controversy"  (Letter  XIX),  says  that  this  creed  is 
"  everywhere  recited  and  professed  to  the  strict  letter." 

What  becomes  of  personal  liberty  here?  Could  any- 
thing be  more  unreasonable,  more  unscriptural,  more 
despotic  ?    Notice  these  two  propositions  : 

1.  That  this  Church  requires  the  .stupid  and  credulous 
people  to  admit  the  Scriptures  only  and  exclusively 
according  to  the  sense  she  pleases  to  put  upon  them,  to 
whom  (as  she  arrogantly  pretends)  it  belongs  to  judge 
of  their  true  sense. 

2.  That  the  common  herd  of  humanity,  outside  of 
the  priesthood  of  Rome,  are  never  to  be  allowed  to 
advance  an  interpretation  of  them,  except  the  so-called 
Fathers  are  all  agreed  on  that  interpretation.  And  yet 
some  of  those  Fathers  were  only  dreamers,  mystics  and 
limping  logicians.    Every  Romish  bishop  and  priest 


*Page  5.    London,  1825. 


420 


PRIVATE  INTERPRETATION,  ETC. 


swears  "to  God  on  his  Holy  Gospels"  to  "procures  a 
far  as  lies  in  his  power"  that  this  doctrine  "shall  be 
held,  and  taught,  and  preached  by  all  who  are  under 
hina,  or  are  entrusted  under  his  care." 

It  is  a  notable  fact  that  the  Church  of  Rome  has 
never  published  any  authoritative  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures  ;  nor  is  there  any  possibility  of  ascertaining' 
what  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  she  has  or  does 
hold.  Even  the  notes  invariably  appended  to  the  Rom- 
ish editions  (and  indeed  without  which  no  editions  what- 
ever are  allowed)  are  of  no  recognized  authority.  Before 
any  member  of  the  Roman  Church,  no  matter  what  his 
logical  and  literary  attainments  may  be,  dare  advance 
an  interpretation,  he  must  prove  that  that  particular 
interpretation  has  always  been,  and  is  still,  held  by  the 
so-called  "  Mother  Church."  It  is  not  what  this  priest, 
this  bishop,  or  that  pope  has  said,  but  what  the 
Church  says ;  and  we  repeat  that  the  Church  of  Rome 
has  never  published  (unless  very  recently)  an  authorita- 
tive interpretation  of  even  one  single  chapter  of  the 
Bible!  The  Church  can  not  speak  except  by  the  mouth 
of  a  general  council,  and  no  general  council  has  yet  thus 
spoken  to  the  world.  Even  after  we  have  found  an 
interpretation,  we  may  discover  it  to  be  contradictory  to 
that  given  by  the  same  Church  at  another  period  under 
different  circumstances ;  and  this  is  admitted  by  no  less 
an  individual  than  Cardinal  Cusanas,  who  was  the  Pope's 
legate  sent  to  Bohemia  about  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth 
century.  "  Nor  is  it  surprising,"  said  this  prelate,  while 
endeavoring  to  induce  the  Bohemians  to  accept  the 
interpretation  of  the  Church  as  to  half-communion,  "if 
the  practice  of  the  Church  interprets  the  Scriptures  at 
one  time  in  one  manner,  and  at  another  in  another— for 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


421 


the  Scriptures  follow  the  Church,  which  is  the  earher  of 
the  two,  and  on  account  of  which  Scripture  (is  given), 
and  not  conversely."* 

Concerning  the  head  of  all  ecclesiastical  authority, 
Bellarmine  says:  "A  lawful  council,  by  the  most  gen- 
eral consent,  is  most  properly  termed  the  Church  "f — 
by  which  he  means  the  Church  of  Rome,  the  Church  of 
the  Dark  Ages.  This  is  what  he  calls  the  "Represen- 
tative Church.  "I  The  Trent  Council,  "  a  lawful  coun- 
cil," according  to  Romish  belief,  tried  its  hand  at  an 
authoritative  interpretation  of  the  sixth  chapter  of  the 
Gospel  of  John,  but  could  not  agree  on  the  matter,  and 
abandoned  even  the  hope  of  coming  to  an  agreement. 
Then  there  is  the  "  Essential  Church,"  which  Bellarmine 
defines  in  the  same  place  to  be  "a  company  of  men  pro- 
fessing the  same  Christian  faith  and  sacraments,  and 
acknowledging  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  be  the  chief  pas- 
tor and  vicar  of  Christ  on  earth."  Aside  from  the 
impossibility  of  appeal  to  such  a  tribunal  to  obtain  the 
sense  of  the  Church,  we  have  here  "laymen"  joined 
with  clerics,  made  a  court  of  appeal.  Be  it  understood 
that  as  yet,  such  a  tribunal  has  not  published  the  sense 
of  the  Church  on  any  single  text  of  Scripture.  Then 
there  is  the  " Consistorial  Church,"  which  Bellarmine 
tells  us  consists  of  "the  Pope  and  cardinals,"  and  is 
called  "the  Court  of  Rome."  Directly,  this  tribunal 
has  published  no  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  ;  but  it 
has  indirectly  sanctioned  and  published  interpretations 
of  isolated  texts.    "  The  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites," 

■*Card.  Cusan.,  Epist.  vii.,  ad  Bohem.  0pp.,  torn,  ii.,  pp.  8.57,  858. 
Basle,  1565. 

|Bell.  de  Cone,  et  Eccles  ,  lib.  i.,  c.  18,  sec.  5.    Prag,  1721. 
JIbid,  lib.  iii.,  c.  2,  De  Eccles. 


422 


PRIVATE  INTF.RPRETAl  ION,  ETC. 


at  Rome,  holds  a  delegated  authority  from  this  tribunal. 
We  shall  give  a  few  samples  of  interpretations  (the 
"  sense  of  the  Church,"  as  it  were")  sanctioned  by  them. 

In  the  London  edition  (^1852)  of  Lignore's  "Glories 
of  Mary,"  we  have  Dr.  Wiseman's  own  sanction  and 
"  cordial  recommendation  to  the  faithful."  In  the  pref- 
ace (p.  xviii.)  we  are  told:  "Remember,  dear  reader, 
that  it  [this  book]  has  been  strictly  examined  by  the 
authority  which  is  charged  by  God  himself  to  instruct 
you,  and  that  that  authority  has  declared  that  it  contains 
NOTHING*  worthy  of  censure."  The  authority  here 
pointed  out  is  the  "Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites," 
delegated  by  the  "  Consistorial  Church."  On  page  215 
we  have  a  very  original  interpretation  of  the  Church's 
sense  of  that  beautiful  and  encouraging  exhortation  of 
Paul  (Heb.  iv.  16)  where  he  says,  "Let  us,  therefore, 
come  boldly  unto  the  throne  of  grace,  that  we  may 
obtain  mercy,  and  find  grace  to  help  in  time  of  need.'" 
To  this  text,  set  out  verbatim,  is  added:  "  Mary  (/.  e., 
the  Blessed  Virgin)  is  that  throne  of  grace  to  which  the 
apostle  St.  Paul,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (iv.  16), 
exhorts  us  to  fly  with  confidence,  that  we  may  obtain 
divine  mercy,  and  all  the  help  we  need  for  our  salvation." 

Again  on  page  88  :  "  In  the  first  chapter  of  the  Book 
of  Genesis  we  read  that  '  God  made  two  great  lights;  a 
greater  light  to  rule  the  day,  and  a  lesser  light  to  rule 
the  night'  (Gen.  i.  16)."  We  are  told  in  this  book 
"that  Christ  is  the  greater  light  to  rule  the  just,  and 
Mary  the  lesser  light  to  rule  sinners!"  The  Psalmist. 
David,  beautifully  said,  alluding  to  the  promised  Mes- 
siah, "  God  hath  anointed  thee  with  the  oil  of  gladness." 


*The  capitals  are  iii  the  original. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


Those  not  of  the  Romish  Church  have  always  appHed 
these  words  to  him  who  is  at  once  our  King,  High 
Priest,  Redeemer,  the  Christ.  The  "  Consistorial 
Church,"  however,  thinks  otherwise,  for  it  declares: 
' '  This  was  foretold  by  the  prophet  David  himself,  for 
he  says  that  God  (so  to  speak)  consecrated  Mary,  Queen 
of  Mercy,  anointing  her  with  the  oil  of  gladness."  Once 
more.  In  the  "Song  of  Solomon"  (i.  6)  we  read, 
' '  They  made  me  keeper  of  the  vineyards. ' '  The  ' '  Con- 
sistorial Church"  tells  us  (p.  23)  "This  refers  to  the 
Most  Blessed  Virgin."  This  is  what  might  be  called 
home-made  Scripture.  The  fact  is,  it  looks  like  the 
work  of  infidels,  like  the  willful  perversion  of  the  Living 
Oracles.  At  least,  it  is  this  kind  of  work  that  makes 
infidels,  while  involving  the  true  sense  of  Scripture  in 
the  mystic  meshes  of  superstitious  mist. 

We  now  come  to  what  Bellarmine  calls  "The  Virtual 
Church;"  that  is,  the  "  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  is  said  to 
be  the  chief  pastor  of  the  whole  Church,  and  hath  in 
himself  eminently  and  virtually  both  truth  and  infalli- 
bility of  judgment,  and  upon  whom  dependeth  all  that 
certainty  of  truth  which  is  found  in  the  whole  Church." 
All  this  is  as  mystical  and  occult  as  it  is  arrogant  and 
deceptive.  What  is  here  called  "The  Virtual  Church" 
is  an  absolute  figment  of  the  fancy — the  dream  of  a  fud- 
dled mystic,  an  emanation  of  a  muddled  and  mischievous 
schoIa.stic.  In  the  first  place,  no  Pope  has  ever  sanc- 
tioned or  published  an  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures. 
Popes,  it  is  true,  have  sanctioned  editions  of  Scripture ; 
but  even  these  were  miserably  faulty  and  unscholarly. 
Clement  VIII.  published  an  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  and 
condemned  the  previous  edition  of  Pope  Sixtus  V.,  who 


424 


PRIVATE  INTERPRETATION,  ETC. 


had  subjected  to  excommunication  any  one  who  should 
dare  to  alter  his  edition,  even  in  the  smallest  particle, 
and  had  declared  that  the  offender  was  not  to  be 
absolved  even  by  a  Pope ! 


THE  HOLY  MOTHER  CHURCH  ALONE 
INTERPRETS  THE  SCRIPTURES. 


We  have  showed  the  sense  which  the  "  Consistorial 
Church"  had  fixed  upon  Gen.  i.  i6.  But  Pope  Greg- 
ory IX.  has  sanctioned  in  his  Decretals  another  inter- 
pretation.    He  says: 

God  made  two  great  lights  in  t!ie  lirmament  of  heaven  ;  the  greater 
light  to  rule  the  day,  and  the  lesser  to  rule  the  night.  For  the  firma- 
ment of  the  heaven,  that  is,  of  the  Universal  Church,  God  made  two 
great  lights  ;  that  is,  lie  appointed  two  dignities,  which  are  the  pontifi- 
cal authority  and  the  kingly  power.* 

This  ludicrous  interpretation  was  addressed  by  Pope 
Innocent  III.  to  the  Emperor  of  Constantinople,  and 
thus  it  had  the  sanction  of  at  least  two  popes.  It  is 
furnished  in  a  Decretal  Epistle,  one  of  the  most  solemn 
papal  documents;  and  Gratian,  in  the  Roman  Canon 
Law,  asserts  that  the  Pope's  Decretal  Epistles  are  to  be 
counted  among  the  Canonical  Scriptures,  f  But  now 
hear  how  profanely  and  contemptuously,  a  Romish 
priest,  Dr.  Doyle,  treated  the  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture by  popes.    We  transcribe  Dr.  Doyle's  own  words : 

As  to  tiie  arguments  from  Scripture  or  tradition  adduced  by  him 
[Pone  Gregory  VII.],  or  by  any  of  his  successors,  tlioy  are  such  as 
will  amuse,  or,  rather,  e.«ite  the  pity  of,  a  serious  mind.  One  [Bon- 
iface VIII.,  a  Pope]  wisely  observed  that,  because  an  apcstle  said  to 

*Decret.  i>.  Greg.  P.  IX.  de  Majoritate  et  Ohedientia.  Tit.  33,  p. 
424.    Turin,  1621;  and  Gesta  Innocentii  III.,  vol.  I.,  29.    Ed.  1632. 

fCor.  Jur.  Can.,  torn.  I.,  Dis.  XIX.,  part  I.,  cap.  vi.,  p.  90. 
Paris,  1G12;  and  col.  55,  edit.  Leipsic,  1839. 

(425) 


426 


THE  HOLY  MOTHER  CHLRCU,  ETC. 


our  Lord,  "Behold,  there  are  two  swords  here,"  the  popt-a  have  a 
right  to  depose  kingp.  Such  an  inference  might  appear  plausil)le  to 
him  who  was  already  resolved  on  a  usurpation  of  riglit:  hut  a  Christian 
is  forced  to  bluih  at  such  a  profanation  of  the  Word  of  God.  Gregory  *  *  * 
quotes  from  St.  I'aul  to  the  Corinthians  ^1  Cor.  vi.  3),  '•  Know  you 
not  that  wc  shall  judge  angels,  themselves  ?  how  much  more  worldly 
thingr?"  and  from  this  passage  he  claims  to  he  invested  with  power 
of  invading  the  rights  of  kings  and  emperors,  nay,  of  remodeling  the 
Btate  of  society  throughout  the  world  ;  *  *  but  to  orfer  argu- 
ments against  sucli  theories  is  too  humiliating  to  the  common  sow  cf  men.* 

Thus  the  "Virtual  Church"  is  taken  to  task  by  a 
priest,  in  no  unmeasured  terms,  for  presuming  to 
advance  profane  interpretations  of  the  Scriptures;  and 
we  doubt  much  if  the  "Virtual  Church"'  will  be 
regarded  as  infallible,  when  generally  known,  even  by 
"good  Catholics. " 

There  is  yet  another  tribunal,  and  that  is  the  parish 
priest.  It  is  a  great  delusion,  under  which  some  laymen 
of  the  Romish  Church  are  laboring,  wlien  they  are  led 
to  believe  that  the  parish  priest,  as  the  representative 
of  the  Church  in  his  district,  is  enabled  to  give  the 
Church's  infallible  interpretation  of  any  given  text. 
Every  parish  priest  may  not  assume  this  position  ;  but 
Bellarmine,  their  great  authority,  may,  we  presutne,  be 
taken  as  a  type.  Take  one  example  of  his  interpreta- 
tion, namely,  on  the  text  Job  i  14:  "The  oxen  were 
plowing,  and  the  asses  feeding  beside  them."  "By  the 
oxen  [says  the  astute  cardinal]  are  meant  the  learned 
doctors  of  the  Church ;  by  the  asses  are  meant  the 
ignorant  people,  which,  out  of  simple  belief,  rest 
satisfied  in  the  understanding  of  their  superiors  "i  We 
do  not  quote  this  in  ridicule;  yet,  while  protesting 

*Dr.  James  Doyle,  "  Essay  on  the  Catholic  Claims,"  etc.  Dublin, 
John  Coyne,  1825,  pp.  52-57. 

tBell.,  lib.  I.,  De  Justif.,  chap,  vii.,  sec.  ix.    Prag.,  1721. 


RLFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


427 


against  this  fanciful  and  perverting  interpretation,  we 
are  persuaded  that  there  is  a  great  deal  of  truth  in  Bel- 
larmine's  estimation  of  the  relative  position  of  the 
parish  priest  and  his  flock. 

But  even  the  parish  priest  dare  not  presume  to  offer 
an  interpretation  of  any  proposed  text,  unless  it  can  be 
shown  that  his  Church  has  held,  and  does  hold,  that 
particular  interpretation:  so  that,  in  fact,  we  come  back 
to  the  original  difficulty  in  ascertaining  what  the  Church 
has  really  taught,  and  does  teach ;  for  it  is  easy  to  show 
that  individual  priests  have  interpreted  the  same  texts 
differently.  "This  fact  is  notorious,"  says  Collette, 
"and  the  difference  is  more  apparent  between  ante-  and 
post  Tridentine  divines.  We  conclude,  therefore,  that, 
if  the  Romanist  be  required  to  hold  that  interpretation 
alone  which  his  Church  has  always  held,  and  does  hold, 
he  will  have  an  insuperable  difficulty  put  in  his  way  in 
reading  or  understanding  the  Scriptures  with  any  profit 
to  himself;  for  we  challenge  the  production  of  such  an 
interpretation." 

Having  sufficiently  investigated  that  part  of  the 
Romish  creed  which  restricts  the  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures  "to  the  sense  which  the  Holy  Mother 
Church  has  held,  and  does  hold,"  we  now  proceed  to 
the  continuation  of  this  Article  of  Faith,  to  believe 
which  is  declared  to  be  neces.sary  for  our  salvation : 
"Nor  will  I  ever  take  or  interpret  them  [the  Scriptures] 
otherwise  than  according  to  the  unanimous  consent  (or 
agreement)  of  the  Fathers."*  This  additional  restriction 
placed  on  the  Scriptures  by  the  Church  of  Rome  was 

*"  Nec  earn  unquam  nisi  juxta  unaniinem  consensuin  Patrum 
accipiam  et  interpretabor, "  Pope  Pius'  Creed.  Art.  III.,  Ck>ncL 
Trid.,  Apud  BuUas,  p.  .311.    llonife,  l'ji)4. 


428 


THE  HOLV  MOTHER  CHURCH,  ETC. 


for  the  first  ti»u  imposed  on  the  Christian  world,  as 
before  stated,  in  November,  1564.  Romanists  are 
challenged  to  produce  this  unanimous  agreement  of  the 
Fathers  on  any  text  of  Scripture  on  which  modern 
Romish  controversialists  rely  in  order  to  support  an\' 
of  the  modern  doctrines  against  which  anti-Romanists 
protest.  It  is  a  significant  fact  that,  at  the  Fourth 
Session  of  the  Council  of  Trent  (z\pril,  1546),  the 
assembled  divines  took  this  very  subject  under  their 
consideration,  and  passed  a  decree,  in  which  they 
stated  that,  "in  order  to  restrain  petulant  spirits,  no 
one  relying  on  his  own  skill,  shall,  in  matters  of  faith 
and  of  morals  pertaining  to  the  edification  of  Christian 
practice,  wresting  the  Sacred  Scriptures  to  his  own 
sense,  dare  to  interpret  them  cotitrary  to  t)u  unanimous 
agreettunt  of  the  Fathers."* 

This,  at  first  sight,  seems  plausible  enough ;  for  he 
indeed  would  be  considered  a  rash  man,  who,  "  relying 
on  his  own  skill,"  should  put  an  interpretation  on  any 
given  text  contrary  to  the  universall)'  accepted  interpre- 
tation of  all  Christian  critics  and  biblical  scholars  from 
the  time  of  the  apostles,  where  such  interpretation  can 
be  ascertained ;  but  this  is  a  very  different  thing  from 
what  the  present  creed  of  the  Roman  Church  requires, 
which  precludes  all  interpretations  whatever,  unless  all 
these  Christian  Fathers  are  agreed  on  that  particular 
interpretation  advanced.  It  may,  therefore,  be  safely 
assumed  that,  down  to  November,  1564,  no  Christian 
was  ever  required  to  subscribe  to  such  a  declaration  of 
faith.  It  is  also  evident,  that  this  is  a  new  "Article  of 
Faith,"  invented  by  Pope  Pius  IV.,  unless,  indeed,  it 

*  "Ant  etiam  contra  unanimem  consensum  Patrum,"  Sess.  IV. 
Decret.  de  fklit.  et  Usu  Sacrorum  Libroram. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


429 


be  considered  as  but  a  modification  and  an  approval  of 
the  requirements  of  the  third  canon  of  the  Fourth 
Lateran  Council,  and  of  the  injunctions  of  Pope  Inno- 
cent IV.  to  the  authorities  at  Lombardy.* 

But  let  us  see  how  this  rule  works,  when  practically 
put  to  the  test.  Take  the  leading  text.  Matt.  xvi.  18, 
relied  on  by  Romanists  to  establish  the  supremacy  of 
Peter,  and,  by  assumed  deduction,  that  of  the  Pope  of 
Rome,  by  declaring  that  Peter  was  the  rock  upon  which 
Christ  was  to  build  his  Church.  Bellarmine  asserted 
that  the  Fathers  (among  whom  the  apostles  of  Christ 
are  not  included)  were  unanimous  in  this  interpretation. 
This  drew  forth  the  rebuke  of  a  celebrated  Roman 
Catholic  writer,  Lannoy,t  who,  in  reply,  showed  that 
sixteen  fathers  and  doctors  interpreted  the  text  in  ques- 
tion as  referring  to  Christ,  and  not  to  Peter.  Eight 
held  that  the  Church  was  not  to  be  built  upon  Peter 
alone,  but  upon  all  the  apostles  equally;  while,  at  the 
same  time,  only  seventeen  adopted  the  modern  Roman 
interpretation.  Not  one  of  them,  however,  derived  from 
that  text  the  Pope's  supremacy.  The  fathers  differ- 
ing, then,  in  interpretation,  this  important  text  must, 
according  to  the  modern  Papal  theory,  remain  a 
dead  letter  practically  to  Romanists.  [The  reductio  ad 
absnrdiiin  sometimes  forcibly  proves  the  fallacy  of  a 
proposition.  The  Romanists  contend  ior  literal  interpre- 
tation here  and  elsewhere.  "The  rock  (they  say)  must 
be  Peter — it  can  not  be  the  doctrine  just  before  propounded 
by  Peter.''  In  this  very  same  chapter.  Matt.  xvi.  23, 
Christ  addresses  Peter:  "Get  thee  behind  me,  Satan;" 


*Labb.  et  Coss.,  torn,  xiv.,  col.  440,  et  $eq.    Paris,  1671. 
fLannoii  Opera, "^^ torn,  v.,  p.  ii.,  pt.  95.    Epist.  VII.,  lib.  v.  Gul. 
Voello.  Col.  AUob,  1731. 


430 


THE  HOLY  MOTHER  CHURCH,  ETC. 


therefore.  Peter  was  literally  the  devil;  therefore,  the 
Church  of  Rome,  being  founded  on  Peter,  is  founded 
on  Satan !] 

Take  another  famous  text  ( I  Cor.  iii.  15),  which  is 
continually  advanced  to  prove  the  Romish  doctrine  of 
purgatory.  Bellarmine*  divides  the  text  into  three 
heads,  or  five  great  difficulties,  and  on  each  head  or 
difficulty  he  shows  various  conflicting  opinions  of  the 
fathers,  and  none  of  them  agreeing  with  the  modern 
Romish  interpretation.  He,  nevertheless,  concludes 
that  the  text  does  refer  to  the  Romish  purgatory;  but, 
so  satisfied  was  Bellarmine  that  there  was  no  unity  of 
interpretation  among  the  fathers,  that  he  was  con- 
strained to  admit  that  ' '  their  writings  were  not  the  rule 
of  faith,  neither  have  they  any  authority  to  bind."t  So 
conscious,  indeed,  are  Romanists  of  their  weakness  in 
this  respect,  that  they  have  corrupted  the  genuine  text 
of  some  of  these  fathers,  to  compel  them  to  mouth 
jnodern  Popery:  at  other  times  they  have  ordered  vari- 
ous passages  to  be  expunged  from  their  works.  Not 
unfrequently  they  palm  off  spurious  productions  of 
later  date  as  the  works  of  an  early  father;  and  when  the 
evidence  against  them  is  too  palpable,  they  do  not  hesi- 
tate to  reject  the  authority  altogether.  For  instance, 
take  one  of  the  fathers,  Augustine,  who,  referring  to 
I  Cor.  iii.  15,  said,  "  By  this  is  meant  tlie  fire  of  tribu- 
lation in  this  world."  Bellarmine  says,  "This  opinion 
of  his  we  have  rejected.  "J    Again  says  Augustine, 

*Bell.,  De  Purg. ,  lib.  i.,  torn,  i.,  c.  4.    Prag.,  1721. 

fScripta  Patrum  non  sunt  regulse  fidei,  iiro  haijeiil  auctorilaU'm 
obllgandi.  Bell.,  De  Concil.  Author.,  lib.  ii.,  c.  VI,  sec.  xii.  I'rag., 
17-21. 

JBell.,  De  Purg.,  lib.  i.,  c.ip.  v.,  sec.  36.    Prag.,  IT.U. 


REFORMATORY  M  O V E M  1:NTS . 


"Those  words  of  St.  Luke,  'I  will  not  henceforth  drink 
of  the  fruit  of  the  vine,'  are  to  be  understood  of  the 
sacramental  cup;"  and  deduced  that  there  was  no 
change  of  the  substance  of  the  elements.  Bellarmine, 
therefore,  again  opposed  him,  and  said,  "He  did  not 
well  consider  of  that  text,  which  appears  by  this  that 
^'he  passed  it  over  lightly."* 

We  have  now  sufficiently  shown  how  designing  men 
"wrest  the  word  of  God  to  their  own  destruction;" 
how,  for  the  accomplishment  of  some  selfish  end,  they 
"handle  the  word  of  God  deceitfully,"  and  how  they 
"  make  merchandise  of  the  gospel,"  if  by  so  doing  they 
may  gain  advantages  over  their  unsuspecting  fellow- 
men,  and  reap  the  reward  of  unrighteousness.  The 
Bible,  the  gospel,  the  apostles,  and  even  Christ  himself, 
are  lost  to  view  and  abandoned  when  plundering  priests 
undertake  to  rear  a  hierarchy  or  introduce  an  order  of 
things  wholly  unknown  in  the  government  of  God. 
History  for  ages  past  is  replete  with  illustrations  of  the 
fact  that,  when  men  will  not  receive  the  truth  in  the 
love  of  it,  God  will  send  them  strong  delusions,  and 
permit  them  to  believe  a  lie,  that  they  may  be  con- 
demned who  take  pleasure  in  unrighteousness,  and  will  not 
obey  the  truth  (2  Thess.  ii.  1 1). 

*Bell.,  De  Euch.,  lib.  i.,  cap.  xi.,  sec.  61. 


HISTORY  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM. 


On  this  question  we  shall  quote  freely  from  Neander's 
History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Cimrch,  as  translated 
by  Prof.  Joseph  Torrey,  Professor  of  Moral  and  Intel- 
lectual Philosophy  in  the  University  of  Vermont,  and 
as  published  by  Crocker  &  Brewster,  Boston,  and  by 
Wiley  &  Putnam,  London.  Dr.  Augustus  Neander 
was  born  in  the  university  town  of  Gottingen.  Germany, 
January  15,  1789;  a  man  universally  conceded  to  be  by 
far  the  greatest  of  ecclesiastical  historians,  and  sur- 
named  "the  father  of  modern  church  history."  He 
was  one  of  the  chief  promoters  of  the  changes  intro- 
duced into  the  Protestant  establishment  of  Prussia,  and 
of  the  compromise  of  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  con- 
fessions. He  is  also  believed  to  have  contributed  more 
than  any  other  single  individual  to  the  overthrow,  on 
the  one  side,  of  that  anti-historical  rationalism,  and,  on 
the  other,  of  that  dead  formal  Lutheranism,  from  both 
of  which  tl>e  religious  life  of  Germany  had  so  long 
suffered.  His  influence  was  so  great  as  to  lead  very 
many  young  men  of  the  fatherland  to  embrace  the  vital 
doctrines  of  Christianity,  for  his  own  theological  views 
were  more  positive  and  ev^angelical  than  those  held  by 
any  of  b-s  colleagues.  By  some  he  was  regarded  aS 
"too  liberal,"  the  meaning  of  which  was  that  he  was 
more  scriptural  than  orthodox — more  Christian  than 
Lutheran.    We  shall  now  hear  him  on  infant  baptism. 

(432) 


R K FO  R  M ATO R V  M O VE M  KNTS. 


433 


Baptism  [l;e  says]  was  administered  at  first  only  to  adults,  as  men 
were  accustomed  to  conceive  baptism  and  faith  as  strictly  connected. 
We  have  all  reason  for  not  deriving  infant  baptism  from  apostoiic 
iustitution,  and  the  recngiiition  of  wiiicli  followed  somewhat  later,  as 
an  apostolical  tradition  serves  to  confirm  this  hypothesis.  Ireuaeus 
(born  between  120  and  140)  is  the  first  church  teach'^r  in  whom  we 
fnd  any  alhaion  t/)  infant  baptism  [italics  ours];  and  in  his  mode  of 
expressing  himself  on  the  subject,  he  leads  us  at  the  same  time  to 
recognize  its  connection  with  the  essence  of  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness ;  he  testifies  of  the  profound  Christian  idea  out  of  which  infant 
baptism  arose,  and  which  procured  for  it  at  length  universal  recogni- 
tion. Irenseus  is  wishing  to  show  that  Christ  did  not  interrupt  the 
progressive  development  of  that  human  nature  which  was  to  be  sanc- 
tified by  him,  but  sanctified  in  accordance  with  its  natural  course  of 
development,  and  in  all  its  several  stages. 

Irenseus  mystically  argues  as  follows :  He  came  to  redeem  all  by 
himself;  all  who  through  him  are  regenerated  to  God  ;  infants,  little 
children,  boys,  young  men  and  old.  Hence  he  (Christ)  passed  througii 
every  age,  and  for  the  infants  he  became  an  infant,  sanctifying  the 
infants ;  among  the  little  children  he  became  a  little  child,  sanctifying 
those  who  belong  to  his  age,  and  at  the  same  time  presenting  to  them 
an  example  of  piety,  of  well-doing  and  of  obedience;  among  the  young 
men  he  became  a  young  man,  that  he  might  set  them  an  example  and 
sanctify  them  to  the  Lord.* 

Neander  proceeds — 

It  is  here  especially  important  to  observe  that  infants  (infantes)  are 
expressly  distinguished  from  children  (pazulis),  whom  Christ  could 
also  benefit  by  his  example;  and  that  they  are  represented  as  capable 
of  receiving  from  Christ,  who  had  appeared  in  their  age,  nothing  more 
than  an  objective  sanctification.  This  sanctification  becomes  thejrs,  in 
so  far  as  they  are  regenerated  by  Christ  to  God.  Regeneration  and 
baptism  are  in  Irenseus  intimately  connected  ;  and  it  is  difficult  to  con- 
ceive how  the  term  regeneration  can  be  employed,  in  reference  to  this 
age,  to  denote  anything  else  than  baptism.  Infant  baptism,  then, 
appears  here  aa  the  medium  through  which  the  principle  of  sanctifica- 
tion, imparted  by  Christ  to  human  nature  from  its  earliest  develop- 
ment, became  appropriated  to  children.  It  is  the  idea  of  infant 
baptism,  that  Christ,  through  the  divine  life  which  he  imparted  to  and 
revealed  in  human  nature,  sanctified  that  nature  from  the  germ  of  its 


*Irenaeu8,  1,  ii.,  c.  22,  sec.  4. 

2? 


434 


HISTOXV  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM. 


earliest  devekpment.  The  child  born  in  a  Christian  family  -wbb,  whes 
all  things  were  as  they  should  be,  to  have  this  advantage  above  others: 
that  he  did  not  first  come  to  Christianity  out  of  heathenism,  or  the 
sinful  nature-life,  but  from  the  first  dawning  of  consciousness,  unfolded 
his  powers  under  the  imperceptible  preventing  influences  of  a  sancti- 
fying, ennobling  religion ;  that  with  the  earliest  germination  of  the 
naiural  self-conscious  life,  transforming  the  natore  should  be  brought 
nigh  to  him,  ere  yet  the  ungodly  principle  could  come  into  ftill  activ- 
ity ;  and  the  latter  should  at  once  find  here  its  powerftd  counterpoise. 
In  such  a  life  the  new  birth  was  not  to  constitute  a  new  crisis,  begin- 
ning at  some  definable  moment,  but  it  was  to  begin  imperceptibly,  and 
so  proceed  through  the  whole  life.  Hence  baptism,  the  risible  sign 
of  regeneration,  was  to  be  given  to  the  child  at  the  very  outset ;  the 
child  was  to  be  consecrated  to  the  Redeemer  from  the  beginning  of  its 
life.  From  this  idea,  founded  on  what  is  inmost  in  Christianity, 
becoming  predominant  in  the  feelings  of  Christians,  resulted  the  prac- 
tice of  infant  baptism. 

This  was  the  mystical,  speculative  doctrine  of  Irenaeus, 
which  was  handed  down  through  the  dark  ages,  and 
which  has  been  several  times  revamped  in  modern 
times.    Neander  continues : 

But  immediately  after  Irenseus,  in  the  last  years  of  the  second  cen- 
tnrv,  Tertnllian  appears  as  a  zealous  opponent  of  infant  baptism  :  a 
proof  thai  the  practice  had  not  as  yet  come  to  be  regarded  as  an  apos- 
tolical institution ;  for  otherwise,  he  hardly  would  have  ventured  to 
express  himself  so  strongly  against  it.  We  perceive  from  his  ao-gument 
against  infant  baptism,  that  its  advocates  already  appealed  to  Matt, 
xix.  14,  a  passage  which  it  would  be  natural  for  every  one  to  apply  in 
this  manner.  "Our  Lord  rebuked  not  the  little  children,  but  com- 
manded them  to  be  brought  to  him  thai  he  might  bless  them."  Ter- 
tnllian advises  that,  in  consideration  of  the  great  importance  of  the 
transaction,  and  of  the  preparation  necessary  to  be  made  for  it  on  tae 
part  of  the  recipients,  baptism,  as  a  general  thing,  should  rather  be 
delayed  than  prematurely  applied,  and  he  takes  this  occasion  to 
declare  himself  particularly  opposed  to  haste  in  the  baptism  of  chil- 
dren. In  answer  to  the  objection  drawn  from  those  words  of  Christ, 
he  replies  :  "  Let  them  come  while  they  are  growing  up  ;  1st  them 
come  while  they  are  learning,  while  they  are  being  taught  to  what  it 
is  they  are  coming  ;  let  them  become  Christians  when  they  are  sus- 
ceptible of  the  knowledge  of  Christ.    What  haste  to  procure  the  ior- 


REFORMATORV  MOVKMENTS. 


435 


givenes!^  r?(  s'.us  for  the  age  of  ianocence !  We  show  more  prudence 
in  ttic  management  of  our  worldly  concerns  than  we  do  in  entrusting 
the  divine  treasure  to  those  who  can  not  be  entrusted  with  earthly 
property.  Let  them  tirst  learn  to  feel  their  need  of  salvation  ;  so  it 
may  appear  that  we  have  given  to  those  that  wanted." 

TertuUian  evidently  means  [says  Neauder]  that  children  should  be 
led  to  Christ  by  instructing  them  in  Christianity  ;  but  that  they  should 
not  receive  baptism  until,  after  having  been  sufficiently  instructed,  ihey 
are  led  from  personal  conviction,  and  by  their  own  free  choice,  to  seek 
for  it  with  sincere  longing  of  the  heart.  It  may  be  said,  indeed,  that 
he  is  only  speaking  of  the  course  to  be  followed  according  to  the  gen- 
eral rule;  whenever  there  was  momentary  danger  of  death,  baptism 
might  be  administered,  even  according  to  his  views.  But  if  he  had 
considered  tiiis  to  be  necessary,  he  could  not  have  failed  to  mention  it 
expressly.  It  seems,  in  fact,  according  to  the  principles  laid  down  by 
him,  that  he  could  not  conceive  of  any  efficacy  whatever  residing  in 
baptism,  without  the  conscious  participation  and  individual  faith  of 
the  person  bajjtized  ;  nor  could  he  see  any  danger  accruing  to  the  age 
of  innocence  from  delaying  it ;  although  this  view  of  the  matter  was 
not  logically  consistent  with  his  own  system. 

The  fact  that  TertuUian  vigorously  opposed  the  doc- 
trine of  infant  baptism,  as  introduced  about  the  middle 
of  the  second  century,  which  was  many  years  after  the 
apostles  had  gone  to  rest,  constitutes  the  highest  and 
clearest  kind  of  evidence  that  infant  baptism  was  an 
innovation,  and  that  it  grew  out  of  the  speculations  of 
Irensus.  The  controversy  continued,  as  further  set 
forth  by  Neander. 

Bat  when,  now,  on  the  one  hand,  the  doctrine  of  the  corruption  and 
guilt,  cleaving  to  human  nature  in  consequence  of  the  first  transgres- 
sion, was  reduced  to  a  more  precise  and  systematic  form,  and  on  the 
other,  from  the  want  of  duly  distinguishing  between  what  is  outward 
and  what  is  inward  baj)ti8m  (the  baptism  by  water  and  the  baptism  by 
the  Spirit),  the  error  became  more  firmly  established  that  without 
external  baptism  no  one  could  be  delivered  from  that  inherent  guilt, 
could  be  saved  from  the  everlasting  punishment  that  threatened  him, 
or  raised  to  eternal  life ;  and  when  the  notion  of  a  magical  influence, 
a  charm  connected  with  the  sacraments,  continually  gained  ground, 


436 


HISTORY  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM 


the  theory  was  tinally  evolved  of  the  unconditional  necessity  of  infant 
baptism. 

About  the  middle  of  the  third  century  this  theory  was  already  gen- 
erally admitted  iu  the  North  African  Church.  The  oaiy  question  that 
remuLued  was,  whether  the  child  ought  to  be  baptized  immediately 
after  its  birth,  or  not  till  eight  days  after,  as  in  the  case  of  the  rite  of 
circumcision.  The  latter  was  the  opinion  of  Bishop  Fidus,  who  pro< 
posed  the  question  to  a  council  convened  at  Carthage.  Cyprian 
answered  it,  in  the  year  252,  in  the  name  of  sixty-six  bishops.  Hia 
answer  evinces  how  full  he  was  of  that  great  Christian  idea  which  has 
just  been  unfolded,  and  out  of  which  the  practice  of  infant  baptism 
proceeded.  But,  embarrassed  by  his  habit  of  confounding  the  inward 
with  the  outward,  by  his  materialism,  he  mingled  with  it  much  that  is 
erroneous.  He  declares  himself  against  the  arbitrary  limitation  of 
Fidus:  "  None  of  us  could  agree  to  your  opinion.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  the  opinion  of  us  all,  that  the  mercy  and  grace  of  God  must  be 
refused  to  no  human  being,  so  soon  as  he  is  bom  ;  for  since  our  Lord 
says  in  his  gospel,  '  The  Son  of  man  is  not  come  to  destroy  men's 
souls,  but  to  save  them'  (Luke  ix.  50),  so  everything  that  lies  in  our 
power  must  be  done  that  no  soul  may  be  lost.  As  God  has  no  respect 
of  persons,  so,  too,  he  has  no  respect  of  age,  offering  himself  as  a 
Father  with  equal  freeness  to  all,  that  they  may  be  enabled  to  obtain 
the  heavenly  grace.  As  to  what  you  say,  that  the  child  in  the  first 
days  of  its  birth  is  not  clean  to  the  touch,  and  that  each  of  us  would 
shrink  from  kissing  such  an  object,  even  this,  in  our  opinion,  ought  to 
present  no  obstacle  to  the  bestowment  of  the  heavenly  grace  :  for  it  is 
written,  'To  the  pure,  all  things  are  pure;  '  and  none  of  us  ought  to- 
revolt  at  that  which  God  has  condescended  to  create.  Although  the 
child  be  but  just  born,  yet  it  is  no  such  object  that  any  one  ought  to 
demur  at  kissing  it  to  impart  the  divine  grace  and  the  salutation  of 
peace  {i.  e.,  the  brotherly  kiss,  which  was  given  to  persons  newly  bap- 
tized, as  the  sign  of  the  fellowship  of  peace  in  the  Lord),  since  each 
of  us  must  be  led,  by  his  own  religious  sensibility,  to  think  upon  the 
creative  hands  of  God,  fresh  from  the  completion  of  their  work, 
which  we  kiss  in  the  newly  formed  man  when  we  take  into  our  arms 
what  God  has  made.  As  to  the  rest,  if  anything  could  prove  a  hin- 
drance to  men  in  the  attainment  of  grace,  much  rather  might  those  be 
hindered  whose  maturer  years  have  involved  them  in  heavy  sins.  But 
if  even  the  chief  of  sinners,  who  have  been  exceedingly  guilty  before 
God,  receive  the  forgiveness  of  sins  on  coming  to  the  faith,  and  no 
one  is  precluded  from  baptism  and  from  grace,  how  much  less  should 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


437 


the  child  be  kept  back,  which,  as  it  is  but  just  born,  can  not  have 
sinned,  but  has  only  brought  with  it,  by  its  descent  from  Adam,  the 
infection  of  the  old  death;  and  which  may  the  more  easily  obtain  the 
remission  of  sins,  because  the  sins  which  are  forgiven  it  are  not  its 
own,  but  those  of  another." 

So  reasons  Cyprian.    The  subject  will  be  continued. 


ORIGIN  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM. 


That  infant  baptism  never  originated  in  the  teaching 
of  the  apostles,  and  that  not  even  a  hint  is  thrown  out 
in  the  New  Testament  in  regard  to  it,  is  made  particu- 
larly manifest  by  the  fact  that,  just  as  soon  as  the  prac- 
tice was  foisted  upon  the  churches  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  second  century,  it  at  once  encountered  vigorous  and 
persistent  opposition.  In  modern  times  it  is  conceded 
by  all  intelligent  and  unbigoted  persons,  that  infant  bap- 
tism originated  in  tradition  long  after  the  age  of  the 
apostles,  and  that  it  has  no  foundation  whatever  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures.  We  continue  the  history  and  the 
controversy  on  infant  baptism  as  narrated  by  Neander. 

In  the  Alexandrian  Church,  also,  which,  in  respect  to  its  whole  the- 
ological and  dogmatic  direction  of  mind,  was  so  essentially  distin- 
guished from  the  Church  of  North  Africa,  we  tind  prevailing,  even  at 
a  somewhat  earlier  period,  the  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  infant  bap- 
tism Origen,  in  whose  system  infant  baptism  could  readily  find  its 
place,*  though  not  in  the  same  connection  as  in  the  system  of  the 
North  African  Church,  declares  it  to  be  an  apostolical  tradition  ;f  an 
expression,  by  the  way,  which  can  not  be  regarded  as  of  much  weight 
in  this  age,  when  the  inclination  was  so  strong  to  trace  every  insUiution,  which 
was  considered  of  special  importance,  to  the  apostles  [italics  ours]  ;  and 

*Namely,  in  its  relation  to  his  theory,  that  human  souls  are  fallen 
heavenly  essences,  and  are  to  be  cleansed  from  a  guilt  which  they 
brought  with  them. 

fThis,  expressly  in  the  fifth  book  of  his  "  Commentary  on  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Romans,"  according  to  the  Latin  translation  of  Eufinus.  In 
Origen's  time,  too,  difficulties  were  still  urged  against  infant  baptism, 
similar  to  those  thrown  out  hy  TertuUian.  Compare  his  Homil.  xiv., 
in  Lacan  (according  to  the  translation  of  Jerome). 

(438) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


439 


when  80  many  walls  of  separation,  hindering  the  freedom  of  prospect, 
had  already  been  set  up  between  this  and  the  apostolic  age.  Also  in 
the  Persian  Church  infant  baptism  was,  in  the  course  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, so  generally  recognized,  that  the  sect  founder,  Mani,  thought  he 
could  draw  an  argument  from  it  in  favor  of  a  doctrine  which  seemed 
to  him  necessarily  presupposed  by  this  application  of  the  rite. 

But  if  the  necessity  of  infant  baptism  was  acknowledged  in  theory, 
it  was  still  far  from  being  uniformly  recognized  in  practice.  Nor  was 
it  always  from  the  purest  motives  that  men  were  induced  to  put  off 
their  baptism.  Precisely  the  same  false  notion  of  baptism  as  an  opus 
operaium  [a  mere  outward  work],  which  had  moved  some  to  consider 
the  baptism  of  infants  so  unconditionally  necessary,  led  many  others, 
who  mistook,  indeed,  in  a  far  grosser  and  more  dangerous  manner,  the 
nature  of  this  rite,  to  delay  their  baptism,  that  they  might,  in  the 
meantime,  the  more  freely  abandon  themselves  to  their  lusts,  and  yet, 
cleansed  in  the  hour  of  death  by  the  magical  annihilation  of  their  sins, 
be  able  to  pass  without  hindrance  into  eternal  life.  We  have  already 
noticed  the  pious  indignation  and  force  with  which  Tertullian,  who 
was  otherwise  opposed  to  haste  in  baptism,  combated  this  error. 

Infant  baptism,  also,  furnished  probably  the  first  occasion  for  the 
appointment  of  sponsors  or  godfathers  ;  for  as  this  was  a  case  in  which 
the  persons  baptized  could  not  themselves  declare  their  confession  of 
faith  and  the  required  renunciation,  it  became  necessary  for  others  to 
do  it  in  their  name  ;  and  these  at  the  same  time  engaged  to  take  care 
that  the  children  should  be  rightly  instructed  in  Christianity,  and 
trained  up  in  a  life  corresponding  to  the  vows  given  at  baptism  ;  hence 
they  were  called  sponsors  {sponsores).  Tertullian  adds  to  his  other 
arguments  against  infant  baptism,  that  these  sponsors  were  obliged  to 
a.s8ume  an  obligation  which  they  might  be  prevented  from  fulfilling, 
either  by  their  own  death  or  by  the  untoward  conduct  of  the  child. 

The  reader  will  understand  that  Neander  himself  was 
a  pedobaptist,  and  that  he  practiced  sprinkling;  and, 
surprising  as  it  may  appear,  in  direct  opposition  to  his 
own  historical  statements,  backed  by  the  incontrovert- 
ible testimony  of  the  times,  he  adopts  these  traditions, 
and  practices  rites  unsupported  by  the  Word  of  God. 
How  a  man  can  be  a  truthful  historian  and  a  misguided 
ecclesiastic  at  one  and  the  same  time,  is  one  of  the  inex- 


440 


ORIGIN  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM. 


plicable  questions  of  the  times  which  we  cart  not  solve 
on  rational  principles.  Such  a  man  has  not  yet  been 
fully  released  from  the  mists  of  m}-stlc  Babylon.  The 
nature  of  the  controversy  which  was  carried  on  in  the 
second  and  third  centuries  gives  corroborative  proof  of 
the  fact  that  the  apostles  were  recognized  as  having 
preached  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins,  as  the  con- 
summating act  in  the  production  of  the  new  spiritual 
life.  Some  went  so  far  as  to  insist  on  trine  immersion, 
which  was  the  extreme  of  the  doctrine  of  infant  baptism, 
with  which  no  free  act  or  moral  act  was  connected. 
Neander  proceeds  to  say  that — 

With  the  act  of  baptism,  several  symbolical  customs  were  united, 
which  flowed  from  the  idea  of  this  transaction,  and  in  which  this  idea 
was  to  be  represented  to  the  senses.  Thus  it  came  about  that,  as  the 
participation  of  the  univer»al  priesthood  of  all  the  faithful  was  consid- 
ered as  necessarily  united  with  the  introduction  to  the  fellowship  of 
Christians,  so  the  symbol  of  priestly  consecration  was  made  to  foUow 
the  act  of  baptism.  As,  in  the  Old  Testament,  anointing  wag  the  sign 
of  consecration  to  the  priestly  office  ;  so  oil,  which  had  been  blessed 
expressly  for  this  purpose,  was  applied  to  the  newly  baptized,  as  a  sign 
of  consecration  to  this  spiritual  priesthood.  We  first  meet  with  this 
custom  in  Tertullian,  and  in  Cyprian  it  appears  already  to  constitute 
an  essential  part  of  the  rite  of  baptism. 

In  a  foot-note,  Neander  says  concerning  Cyprian : — 

Yet  in  the  book  De  Corona  Milet,  c.  3,  where  he  describes  the  usages 
in  baptism  which  were  derived,  not  from  Scripture,  but  from  ecclesias- 
tical tradition,  he  makes  no  mention  of  this  unction.  The  imposition 
of  hands,  accompanied  by  prayer,  with  which  the  act  of  baptism  was 
concluded,  is,  beyond  doubt,  a  still  older  custom.  The  sign  of  the 
imposition  of  hands  (iTri'iJeojf  tov  x^ipov  ;fs<poi?£fT(a)  was  the  common 
token  of  religious  consecration,  borrowed  from  the  Jews  [but  not  from 
the  apostles],  and  employed  on  various  occasions,  either  to  denote  con- 
secration to  the  Christian  calling  in  general,  or  to  the  particular 
branches  of  it.  The  apostles,  or  presiding  officers  of  the  church,  lay- 
ing their  hands  on  the  head  of  the  baptized  individual,  called  upon 
the  Lord  to  bestow  his  blessing  on  the  holy  transaction  now  completed, 


KICFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


■to  cause  to  be  filled  in  him  whatever  was  implied  in  it,  to  consecrate 
liim  with  his  Spirit  for  the  Christian  calling,  and  to  pour  out  his  Spirit 
upon  him.  This  closing  rite  was  inseparably  connected  with  the 
whole  liie  of  baptism. 

All,  indeed,  had  reference  here  to  the  same  principal  thing,  without 
which  no  one  could  be  a  Christian — the  birth  to  a  new  life  from  God, 
the  baptism  of  the  Spirit,  which  was  symbolically  represented  by  the 
baptism  of  water.  Tertullian  still  considers  this  transaction  and  bap- 
tism as  one  whole,  belonging  together  ;  although  he  distinguishes  in  it 
the  two  separate  moments,  the  negative  and  the  positive,  the  forgive- 
ness of  sin  and  cleansing  from  sin,  which  was  mediated  by  baptism  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  impartation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  following  thereupon,  upon  the  individual  now  restored 
to  the  original  state  of  innocence,  to  which  impartation  the  imposition 
of  hands  refers.* 

But  now,  since  the  idea  had  sprung  up  of  a  spiritual  character 
belonging  exclusively  to  the  bishops,  or  successors  of  the  apostles,  and 
communicated  to  them  by  ordination ;  on  which  character  the  propa- 
gation of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  Church  was  dependent,  it  was  consid- 
ered as  their  prerogative  to  seal,  by  this  consecration  of  the  imposition 
of  hands,  the  whole  act  of  baptism ;  (hence  the  rite  was  called  signacu- 
lum,  (Ti^payi'f) .  It  was  supposed  that  a  good  and  valid  reason  could  be 
drawn  from  the  fact  that  the  Samaritans,  baptized  by  a  deacon,  were 
first  endowed  with  spiritual  gifts  by  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the 
apostles,  which  was  added  afterward  (Acts  xix.),  as  this  passage  was 
then  understood.  So  now  the  presbyters,  and,  in  case  of  necessity, 
even  the  deacons,  were  empowered  to  baptize,  but  the  bishops  only 
were  authorized  to  consummate  that  second  holy  act.  This  notion  had 
been  formed  so  early  as  the  middle  of  the  third  century.  The  bishops 
were  under  the  necessity,  therefore,  of  occasionally  going  through 
their  dioceses  in  order  to  administer  to  those  who  had  been  baptized 
by  their  subordinates,  the  country  presbyters,  the  rite  which  was  after- 


*De  Baptismo,  c.  8  :  Dehinc  manus  imponitur  per  benedictionem, 
advocans  et  invitans  Spiritum  sanctum.  He  names  together,  de  res 
earn.,  c.  8,  i'j  connection  with  baptism,  all  the  three  things  which 
afterward,  separated  from  it  and  combined  together  in  one  whole,  con- 
stituted in  the  Roman  Church  the  sacrament  of  confirmation :  the 
unction,  conveying  with  it  the  consecration  of  the  soul  ;  the  signing 
with  the  cross,  conveying  with  it  protection  from  evil ;  the  imposition 
of  hands,  the  illuminatio  spirltus. 


442 


ORIGIN  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM. 


ward  denominated  confirmation.  [A  rite  never  instituted  by  the 
apoeUes  of  Jesus  Christ — Author.]  In  ordinary  cases,  where  the 
bishop  himself  administered  the  baptism,  both  were  still  united  together 
as  one  whole,  and  thus  constituted  the  complete  act  of  baptism. 

After  all  this  had  been  performed,  in  many  of  the  churches — in 
those,  for  instance,  of  Xorth  Africa  and  Alexandria — there  was  given 
to  the  person  newly  baptized  a  mixture  of  milk  and  honey,  as  a,  symbol 
of  filiation  into  the  new  life,  and  as  a  spiritual  application  of  the 
promise  concerning  the  land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  to  that 
heavenly  country,  with  all  its  blessed  privileges,  to  wliicii  the  baptized 
belonged.  He  was  then  received  into  the  church  by  the  first  kiss  of 
Christian  brotherhood,  the  salutation  of  peace,  of  that  peace  with  God 
which  he  now  participated  in  in  common  with  all  Christians ;  and  from 
henceforth  he  had  the  right  of  saluting  all  Christians  with  this  fra- 
ternal sign.  But  Clement  of  Alexandria  had  already  to  complain  that 
this  brotherly  kiss,  originally  a  natural  expression  of  Christian  feeling, 
was  become  an  opus  operatum — a  thing  of  conscious  display,  by  which 
the  suspicion  of  the  heathen  was  excited.  His  objection  to  it  is,  that 
love  evinces  itself,  not  in  the  brotherly  kiss,  but  in  the  dispoeition  of 
the  heart.* 

Augustine  is  the  originator  of  the  doctrine  of  "  orig- 
inal sin,"  or  "total  hereditar\-  depravity."  He  flour- 
ished in  the  fourth  century.  His  postulates  from  his 
reasoning  process  are  these :  The  whole  human  family 
is  totally  depraved,  by  virtue  of  the  first  trangression. 
Infants  are  totally  depraved  because  they  are  constitu- 
ent parts  of  the  human  family.  But,  inasmuch  as  they 
can  neither  think,  nor  reason,  nor  believe,  nor  exercise 
any  sort  of  freedom  of  will,  something  must  be  done  to 
wipe  out  the  stain  of  original  sin.  The  act  of  baptism 
is  the  regenerating  act,  in  his  speculative  theology,  that 
removes  from  the  soul  of  the  infant  the  stain  of  original 
sin !  Here  is  where  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regenera- 
tion is  fully  set  forth,  which,  after  the  lapse  of  many 


•Neander's  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  vol.  i., 
•7p.  314-317. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


443 


centuries,  was  taken  up  and  revamped  by  John  Calvin, 
adopted  by  his  ecclesiastical  compeers,  and  in  subse- 
quent years  preached  by  John  Wesley,  and  published 
in  his  Doctrinal  Tracts,  which,  in  later  editions,  without 
his  knowledge  or  consent,  has  been  erased  by  a  com- 
mittee of  Episcopal  Methodists  ;  by  order  of  the  Gen- 
eral Conference,  we  suppose. 


VALIDITY  OF  BAPTISM. 


Consequent  upon  the  introduction  of  infant  baptism 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century,  there  sprang  up 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  third  century  hot  and  animated 
disputations  on  the  validity  of  baptism  ;  on  the  one  side, 
under  the  leadership  of  Bishop  Stephanus,  of  Rome, 
and,  on  the  other  side,  under  the  leadership  of  Cyprian, 
of  Carthage.  It  is  only  necessary  to  give  the  results  of 
these  discussions,  without  going  into  historical  and  the- 
ological detail.  Here,  where  innovations  began  to  creep 
into  the  congregations  of  Christ,  and  where  the  teaching 
of  the  apostles  began  to  be  perverted,  "  theologians" — 
scholastics — begin  to  use  such  terms  as  "objective  valid- 
ity" and  "subjective  validity,"  "external  form"  and 
"inward  grace" — terms  of  speech  never  used  by  the 
apostles,  and  the  tendency  of  which  never  fails  to  con- 
fuse and  perplex  the  common  mind. 

There  were  two  points  in  dispute.  In  respect  to  the 
first,  the  Roman  party  maintained  that  the  validity  of 
baptism  depended  simply  upon  its  being  administered 
as  instituted  by  Christ.  The  formula  of  baptism,  in 
particular,  gave  to  it  its  objective  validity ;  it  mattered  not 
what  was  the  subjective  character  of  the  priest,  who 
served  merely  as  an  instrument  in  the  transaction;  it 
was  of  no  consequence  where  the  baptism  was  adminis- 
tered. That  which  is  objectively  divine  in  the  transac- 
tion could  evince  its  power,  the  grace  of  God  could  thus 

(444) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS, 


44S 


operate  through  the  objective  symbol,  if  it  but  found  in 
the  person  baptized  a  recipient  soul ;  that  person  could 
receive  the  grace  of  baptism,  wherever  he  might  be  bap- 
tized, through  his  own  faith,  and  through  his  own  dis- 
position of  heart.  But  Cyprian  brings  against  his 
opponents  a  charge  of  inconsistency,  from  which  they 
could  not  easily  defend  themselves.  He  reasoned  that 
if  the  baptism  of  heretics  (such,  for  instance,  as  the 
Gnostics  and  Montanists)  possessed  an  objective  validity, 
then,  for  the  same  reason,  their  confirmation  must  also 
possess  an  objective  validity.  "For  (says  Cyprian)  if 
a  person  born  out  of  the  Church  (namely,  to  the  new 
life)  may  become  a  temple  of  God,  why  may  not  the 
Holy  Spirit  be  poured  out  on  this  temple?  He  who 
has  put  off  sin  in  baptism,  and  become  sanctified,  spirit- 
ually transformed  into  a  new  man,  is  capable  of  receiv- 
ing the  Holy  Spirit.  The  apostle  says :  '  As  many  of 
you  as  are  baptized  [into  Christ],  have  put  on  Christ.' 
It  follows,  then,  that  he  who  may  put  on  Christ  when 
baptized  by  heretics,  can  much  more  receive  the  Holy 
Spirit  which  Christ  has  sent ;  as  if  Christ  could  be  put 
on  without  the  Spirit,  or  the  Spirit  could  be  separated 
from  Christ." 

On  the  other  hand,  the  other  party  held  that  no  bap- 
tism could  be  valid  unless  administered  in  the  true 
church,  where  alone  the  efficacious  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  exerted.  If  by  this  was  understood  merely  an 
outward  being  in  the  Church,  an  outward  connection 
with  it,  the  decision  of  the  question  would  be  easy. 
But  what  Cyprian  really  meant  here  (says  Neander)  was 
jin  inward  subjective  connection  with  the  true  church  by 
jaith  and  disposition  of  heart.    He  took  it  for  granted 


446 


VALIDITY  OF  BAPTISM. 


that  the  officiating  priest  himself,  by  virtue  of  his  faith, 
must  be  an  organ  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  enabled  by 
the  magical  influence  of  his  priestly  office,  duly  to  per- 
form the  sacramental  acts ;  to  communicate,  for  example, 
to  the  water  its  supernatural,  sanctifying  power.  But 
when  the  matter  took  this  shape — was  made  thus  to 
depend  on  the  subjective  character  of  the  priest — it 
became  difficult,  in  many  cases,  to  decide  as  to  the  valid- 
ity of  a  baptism,  which  must  be  the  occasion  of  much 
perplexity  and  doubt ;  for  who  could  look  into  the  heart 
of  the  officiating  priest  ? 

But  we  are  told  the  Roman  party  went  still  further  in 
their  defense  of  the  objective  significancy  of  the  formula 
of  baptism.  Even  the  baptism  where  the  complete 
form  was  not  employed,  but  administered  simply  in  the 
name  of  Christ,  they  declared  to  be  objectively  valid. 
Cyprian  maintained,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  formula 
of  baptism  had  no  longer  significancy  when  not  in  the 
full  form  instituted  by  Christ.  "We  perceive  here," 
says  Neander,  ' '  the  more  liberal  Christian  spirit  of  the 
anti-Cyprian  party.  The  thought  hovered  vaguely 
before  their  minds  that  everything  that  pertains  to 
Christianity  is  properly  embraced  in  the  faith  in  Christ." 

Cyprian  himself,  however,  did  not  venture  to  limit 
God's  grace  by  such  outward  things  in  cases  where  con- 
verted heretics  had  already  been  admitted  without  a 
new  baptism,  and  had  enjoyed  the  fellowship  of  the 
Church,  or  died  in  it.  "  God,"  he  observes,  "  is  great 
in  his  mercy,  to  show  indulgence,  and  not  exclude  from 
the  benefits  of  the  Church  those  who  have  been  received 
into  it  formally,  and  thus  fallen  asleep."  A  remarkable 
case  of  this  sort  is  narrated  by  Dionysius,  of  Alexandria  : 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


447 


There  was  in  the  church  of  Alexandria  a  converted  heretic  who 
lived  a8  a  member  of  the  church  for  many  years,  and  participated  in 
the  various  acts  of  worship.  Happening  once  to  be  present  at  a  bap- 
tism of  catechumens,  he  remembered  that  the  baptism  which  he  himself 
had  received  in  the  sect  from  which  he  was  converted,  probably  a 
Gnostic  sect,  bore  no  resemblance  whatever  to  the  one  he  now  wit- 
neased.  Had  he  been  aware  that  whoever  possesses  Christ  in  faith, 
possesses  all  that  is  necessary  to  his  growtli  in  grace,  and  to  the  salva- 
tion of  his  soul,  this  circumstance  could  not  have  given  him  so  much 
uneasiness.  But  as  this  was  not  so  clear  to  him,  he  doubted  as  to  his 
title  to  consider  himself  a  real  Christian,  and  fell  into  the  greatest 
distress  and  anxiety,  believing  himself  to  be  without  baptism  and  the 
grace  by  baptism.  In  tears  he  threw  himself  at  the  bishop's  feet  and 
besought  him  for  baptism.  The  bishop  endeavored  to  quiet  his  fears  ; 
he  assured  him  that  he  could  not,  at  this  late  period,  after  he  had  so 
long  partaken  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  be  baptized  anew. 
It  was  sufficient  that  he  had  lived  so  long  a  time  in  the  fellowship  of 
the  church,  and  all  he  had  to  do  was  to  approach  the  Holy  Supper 
with  unwavering  faith  and  a  good  conscience.  But  the  disquieted 
man  found  it  impossible  to  overcome  his  scruples  and  regain  his  tran- 
quillity. 

We  are  informed  that  in  the  North  African  Church 
men  willingly  followed,  for  the  most  part,  the  example 
of  the  Mother  Church  at  Rome,  but  were  at  the  same 
time  far  from  submitting  their  own  judgment  to  the 
authority  of  that  Church.  At  a  council  held  in  Car- 
thage, over  which  the  Bishop  Agrippinus  presided, 
seventy  bishops  of  North  Africa  declared  themselves  for 
the  opposite  opinion.  Yet  neither  party  was  disposed 
as  yet  to  obtrude  its  own  views  and  practices  on  the 
other.  The  churches  which  differed  on  this  point  in  no 
case  dissolved  the  bond  of  fraternal  harmony  on  account 
of  a  disagreement  "which  so  little  concerned  the  essen- 
tials of  Christianity."  But  here,  again,  it  was  a  Roman 
bishop,  Stephanus,  who,  instigated  by  the  spirit  of 
ecclesiastical  arrogance,  domination,  and  zeal  without 


448 


VALIDITY  OF  BAPTISM. 


knowledge,  attached  to  this  point  of  dispute  a  para- 
mount importance.  Hence,  toward  the  close  of  the 
year  253,  he  issued  a  sentence  of  excommunication 
against  the  bishops  of  Asia  Minor,  Cappadocia,  Galatia 
and  Cilicia,  stigmatizing  them  as  "anabaptists"  {avafiaz- 
zcara!),  a  name,  however,  which  they  could  justly  affirm 
they  did  not  deserve  by  their  principles  ;  for  it  was  not 
their  wish  to  administer  a  second  baptism  to  those  who 
had  already  been  baptized,  but  they  contended  that  the 
previous  baptism,  given  by  heretics,  could  not  be  recog- 
nized as  a  true  one. 

Any  one  conversant  with  the  New  Testament  knows 
full  well  that  the  apostles  knew  nothing  of  such  meta- 
physical terms  as  "objective  validity"  and  "subjective 
condition  of  the  soul."  They  preached  "  Christ  and  him 
crucified,"  without  the  thought  of  raising  a  question. 
They  preached  solely  by  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ, 
without  examining  into  remote  causes  and  direct  effects. 
They  did  not  trouble  themselves  with  ultimate  causes, 
nor  did  they  pretend  to  know  much  about  the  subjective 
condition  of  the  soul ;  but,  under  a  divine  com.mission, 
they  preached  the  glad  tidings  of  salvation  to  a  world 
lying  in  sin  and  darkness,  and,  through  the  invitation  of 
the  glad  tidings,  urged  sinners  to  forsake  sin  and  return 
to  God.  They  preached  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  repent- 
ance toward  God,  and  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins. 
The)'  preached  positive  obedience  to  Jesus  Christ  as 
Prophet,  Priest  and  King,  and  did  not  preach  degrees 
of  obedience.  They  preached  positive  obedience  to  the 
Son  of  God,  and  not  "the  spirit  of  obedience" — a  kind 
of  preaching  which  has  become  very  popular  in  modern 
times.    But  to  return  to  the  "  form  of  baptism  "  again. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


449 


As  to  the  form  of  baptism,  Neander  says : 

In  respect  to  the  form  of  baptism,  it  was,  in  conformity  with  the 
original  institution  and  the  original  import  of  the  symbol,  performed 
by  immersion,  as  a  sign  of  entire  baptism  into  the  Holy  Spirit,  of 
being  entirely  penetrated  by  the  same.  It  was  only  with  the  sick, 
where  the  exigency  required  it,  that  any  exception  was  made ;  and  in 
this  case  baptism  was  administered  by  sprinkling. 

That  is  to  say,  immersion  was  administered  by  sprink- 
Hng,  which,  to  say  the  least,  is  consummate  nonsense. 
Neander  continues  his  narrative : 

Many  superstitious  persons,  clinging  to  the  outward  form,  imagined 
that  such  baptism  by  sprinkling  was  not  fully  valid ;  and  hence  they 
[not  the  inspired  apostles,  but  innovators  upon  the  divine  plan — 
Author]  distinguished  those  who  had  been  so  baptized  by  denomina- 
ting them  the  cUnici* — i.  e.,  those  baptized  upon  beds. 

The  first  departure  from  the  original  mode  is  the  case 
of  Novatian,  who,  probably  in  the  year  253,  or  there- 
about, had  water  poured  upon  his  person  in  bed, 
according  to  the  testimony  of  Eusebius.f  Referring  to 
the  case  of  Novatian,  Neander  says: 

After  his  restoration  from  this  demoniacal  disease  [a  disease  of  the 
mind  supposed  to  exist  in  that  age],  it  is  objected  again,  that  he  fell 
into  a  severe  fit  of  sickness  [which  may  be  very  naturally  explained  ; 
the  crisis  in  his  whole  organic  system,  for  which  he  was  indebted  to 
the  restoration  from  that  frenzy-like  condition,  was  the  cause  of  his 
sickness],  and  that  in  the  apprehension  of  death,  he  received  baptism, 
but  baptism  only  by  sprinkling,  as  his  condition  required  [the  baptis- 
mm  clmieonum  not  being  according  to  the  usual  practice  of  those  times, 
by  immersion],  if  it  could  be  said,  indeed,  that  such  a  one  had  been 
baptized  at  all.^ 


•Neander's  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  yol.  i.,  p. 
310. 

fEusebius,  p.  114. 

JNeander's  History,  etc.,  vol.  i.,  note  2,  p.  238. 
30 


45© 


VALIDITY  OF  BAPTISM. 


Neander  was  so  well  acquainted  with  the  history  of 
the  Apostolic  Church,  and  so  well  versed  in  Greek  lit- 
erature and  Greek  philology,  as  to  know  beyond  a  doubt 
that  sprinkling  was  an  innovation  upon  the  baptism  or 
immersion  ordained  by  the  great  Head  of  the  Church. 
Why,  then,  exchange  a  certainty  for  an  uncertainty? 
Why  rest  upon  doubt  when  you  can  have  the  undoubted  ? 


HISTORY  OF  SPRINKLING. 


We  have  previously  shown,  according  to  the  testi- 
mony of  the  first  church  historian,  Eusebius,  that 
by  the  twelfth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Neo-Caesarea, 
the  clinici,  or  those  sprinkled  upon  sick-beds,  were 
prohibited  the  priesthood.  Referring  to  the  word 
"  be-sprinkled,"  Eusebius  says:  "This  word  petichu- 
theis,  Rufinus  very  well  renders  perfusus,  besprinkled ; 
for  people  who  were  sick,  and  were  baptized  in  their 
beds,  could  not  be  dipped  in  water  by  the  priest,  but 
were  sprinkled  with  water  by  him.  This  baptism  was 
thought  imperfect,  and  not  solemn,  for  several  reasons. 
Also,  they  who  were  thus  baptized  were  called  after- 
ward chnici ;  and  by  the  twelfth  canon  of  the  Council  of 
Neo-Caesarea,  these  clinici  were  prohibited  the  priest- 
hood." This  fact  of  itself  proves  conclusively  that  the 
substitution  of  sprinkling  for  immersion  was  regarded 
as  an  innovation  by  the  so-called  "  Church  Fathers,"  or 
by  those  bishops  or  presbyters  who  immediately  suc- 
ceeded the  apostles. 

Dr.  Wm.  Wall,  of  England,  who  was  for  fifty-two 
years  (1676-1728)  Vicar  of  Shoreham,  Kent,  and  who, 
among  other  works,  published  one  entitled  Infant  Bap- 
tism Asserted  and  Vindicated,  and  one  entitled  History 
of  Infant  Baptism,  in  Two  Parts,  and  who  therefore  can 
not  be  suspected  of  any  partiality  for  immersionists, 
gives  such  a  history  of  sprinkling  and  pouring  as  must 
satisfy  every  candid  and  disinterested  person,  that  these 

(451) 


452 


HISTORY  OF  SPRINKLING. 


innovations  came  into  use  by  slow  degrees  and  by  sinu- 
ous methods,  and  only  in  some  of  the  more  western 
parts  of  the  Western  Latin  Church,  and  that  for  full 
thirteen  centuries  the  whole  religious  world  practiced 
immersion,  with  the  exception  of  invalids  and  pretend- 
ers of  inability  to  endure  cold  bathing.  Bonaventure, 
in  A.  D.  1160,  alludes  to  sprinkling  in  France  as  becom- 
ing an  ordinary  practice.  Likewise  the  Synod  of 
Anglers,  A.  D.  1275,  speaks  of  dipping  and  pouring  as 
indifferent.  The  Synod  of  Aix,  1585,  allowed  pouring, 
or  dipping  or  pouring,  according  to  the  usage  of  the 
Church,  but  commanded  the  water  to  be  poured  out  of 
ladles. 

The  innovation  made  very  little  progress  in  Italy, 
or  in  Germany,  or  in  Spain,  until  the  fourteenth  and 
fifteenth  centuries.  Erasmus,  who  spent  some  time  in 
England  during  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  observes: 
"With  us  [the  Germans]  people  have  the  water  poured 
on  them.  In  England  they  are  dipped."  In  his  col- 
loquy entitled  Icli  Tims  Phagia,  supposed  to  have  been 
written  in  England,  he  represents  infants  as  "dipped  all 
over  in  cold  water,  soon  after  birth,  and  that,  too.  in  a 
stone  font."  Wicklifife  thought  it  immaterial  whether 
they  be  dipped  once,  or  thrice,  or  have  water  poured 
upon  their  heads,  according  to  the  custom  of  the 
church  to  which  they  happen  to  belong.  The  Maniiale 
ad  Usum  Savum,  printed  in  1530,  the  twenty-first  yeai" 
of  Henry  VIII.,  orders,  "Let  the  priest  baptize  him 
[the  candidate]  by  dipping  him  in  the  water  thrice." 
So  decrees  the  Common  Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI., 
1549,  which  says,  "The  priest  shall  dip  it  in  the  water 
thrice."  Edward  himself  was  immersed:  so  was  Queen 
Elizabeth.    So  are  many  of  the  Church  of  England  at 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


453 


the  present  day,  both  in  Europe  and  America.  Immer- 
sion continued  during  Queen  Mary's  reign.  Watson, 
a  Papist  bishop,  in  1558,  the  last  of  the  Queen's  reign, 
pubHshed  a  volume  on  the  sacraments,  in  which  he 
says:  "Though  the  old  ancient  tradition  of  the  Church 
has.  been  from  the  beginning  to  dip  the  child  three 
times,  it  is  sufficient. "  So  think  many  now,  who  have 
more  regard  for  tradition  than  they  have  love  for  the 
Word  of  God.    But  now  let  us  hear  Wall : 

U  being  allowed  to  weak  children  (though  strong  enough  to  be 
brought  to  church)  to  be  baptized  by  affusion,  many  fond  ladies  and 
gentlewomen  first,  and  then  by  degrees  the  common  people,  would 
obtain  the  favor  of  the  priest  to  have  their  children  pass  for  weak 
children,  too  tender  to  endure  dipping  in  the  water.  "  Especially," 
as  Mr.  Walker  observes,  "if  some  instances  really  were,  or  were  but 
fancied  and  framed,  of  some  child  taking  cold  or  being  otherwise 
prejudiced  by  it.s  being  dipped." 

And  another  thing  that  had  a  greater  influence  than  this  was,  that 
•many  of  our  English  divines  and  olher  people  had,  during  Queen 
Mary's  bloody  reign,  fled  into  Germany,  Switzerland,  etc.;  and  coming 
back  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  they  brought  with  them  a  great  love 
to  the  customs  of  those  Protestant  churches  wherein  they  had 
sojourned  :  and  especially  the  authority  of  Calvin,  and  the  rules 
which  he  had  established  at  Geneva,  had  a  mighty  influence  on  a  great 
number  of  our  people  about  that  time.  Now  Calvin  had  not  only 
given  his  dictate  in  his  Institutes,  that  "the  difference  is  of  no 
moment,  whether  he  that  is  baptized  be  dipjied  all  over  ;  and  if  so, 
whether  thrice  or  imce  ;  or  whether  he  be  only  wetted  with  the  water 
poured  on  him  ; "  but  he  had  also  drawn  up  for  the  use  of  his  church 
at  Geneva  (and  afterward  published  to  the  world),  a  form  of  adminis- 
tering the  sacrament,  where,  when  he  comes  to  order  the  act  of  bap- 
tizing, he  words  it  thus:  "  Tiien  the  minister  of  baptism  pours  water 
on  the  infant,  saying,  'I  baptize  thee,'  etc."  There  have  been,  as  I 
said,  some  synods  in  some  dioceses  in  France  that  have  spoken  of  affu- 
sion without  mentioning  immersion  at  all ;  tiiat  being  the  common 
practice  ;  but  for  an  office  or  liturgy  of  any  cliurcli,  this  is,  I  believe, 
the  first  in  the  world  that  prescribes  affusion  absolutely.  Then  Muscu- 
lus  had  determined — "As  for  dip[iing  of  the  infant,  we  judge  that  not 
80  necessary  ;  but  that  it  is  free  for  the  church  to  baptize  either  by 


454 


HISTORY  OF  SPKINKI.ING. 


dipping  or  sprinkling."  So  that  (as  Mr.  Walker  observes)  no  wonder 
if  that  custom  prevailed  at  home,  which  our  reformed  divines  in  the 
time  of  the  Marian  persecution  had  found  to  be  the  judgment  of  other 
divines,  and  seen  to  be  tlie  practice  of  otlier  churches  abroad;  and 
especially  of  Mr.  Calvin  and  his  church  at  Geneva. 

And  when  there  was  added  to  all  this  the  resolution  of  such  a  man 
as  Dr.  Whitaker,  Religious  Professor  at  Cambridge:  "Though  in  case 
of  grown  persons  that  are  in  health  I  think  dij)ping  to  be  better;  yet 
in  the  case  of  infants  and  of  sickly  people,  I  think  sprinkling  suffi- 
cient;" the  inclination  of  the  people,  backed  with  these  authorities, 
carried  the  practice  against  the  rubric,  which  still  required  dipping, 
except  in  case  of  weakness.  So  that  in  the  latter  times  of  Queen 
Elizabeth,  and  during  the  reigns  of  King  James  and  King  ChWles  I. 
very  few  children  were  dipped  in  the  font. 

In  regard  to  the  usi  of  basins,  Dr.  Wall  remarks: 

The  use  was,  the  minister  continuing  in  his  reading-desk,  the  child 
was  brought  and  held  below  him ;  and  there  was  placed  for  that  use  a 
little  basin  of  water,  about  the  bigness  of  a  syllabub-pot,  into  which 
the  minister  dipping  his  fingers,  aod  then  holding  his  hand  over  the 
face  of  the  child,  some  drops  would  fall  from  his  fingers  on  the  child's 
face.  For  the  Directory  says  it  is  "not  only  lawful,  but  most  expedi- 
ent," to  use  pouring  or  sprinkling. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  not  one  word  of  the  Scrip- 
tures is  quoted  by  Dr.  Wall  in  support  of  this  "expedi- 
ent," nor  is  the  lawfulness  of  it  found  anywhere  except 
in  human  directories.  The  same  distinguished  author 
informs  us  how  the  Church  of  England,  which  origin- 
ated in  the  sixteenth  century,  under  the  supervision  of 
Henry  VIII.,  came  to  change  the  practice.    He  says: 

Upon  the  review  of  the  Common  Prayer-book,  at  the  Restoration, 
the  Church  of  England  did  not  think  fit  (however  prevalent  the  custom 
of  sprinkling  was)  to  forego  this  maxim — that  it  is  most  fitting  to  dip 
children  that  are  well  able  to  bear  it.  But  they  leave  it  wholly  to  the 
judgment  of  the  godfathers  and  those  who  bring  the  child,  whether 
the  child  may  well  endure  dipping  or  not ;  as  they  are,  indeed,  tlie 
most  proper  judges  of  that.  So  the  priest  is  now  ordered,  "  If  the 
godfathers  do  certify  him  that  the  child  may  well  endure  it,  to  dip  it 
in  the  water  discreetly  and  warily.    But,  if  they  certify  the  child  is 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


455 


weak,  it  shall  suflBce  to  pour  water  upon  it."  The  diflference  is  onlj 
this  :  hj  the  rubric,  as  it  stood  before,  the  priest  was  to  dip,  unless 
there  was  an  allegation  of  weakness.  Now,  he  is  not  to  dip  unless 
there  be  an  averment  or  certifying  of  strength  sufficient  to  endure  it. 

This  does  not  read  very  apostolic;  nevertheless,  it 
passes  for  gospel  in  modern  times.  Turn  over  the 
pages  of  the  New  Testament,  especially  the  Acts  of 
Apostles,  which  contains  a  history  of  the  preaching  of 
the  apostles,  and  there  discover,  if  you  can,  where  an 
apostle  or  anybody  else  ever  ordered  that  a  child,  or  an 
adult,  should  be  dipped  into  water  "discreetly  and 
warily."  Where  do  you  read  about  "  godfathers  "  and 
the  certification  of  godfathers  in  the  New  Testament,  or 
even  in  the  Old  Testament?  Among  the  most  dis- 
tinguished men  of  the  Church  of  England  who,  in  Dr. 
Wall's  time,  or  before  his  time,  contended  for  immer- 
sion, are  Scotus,  Mede,  Bishop  Taylor,  Dan  Rogers,  Sir 
Norton  Knatchbull,  Walker,  Towerson,  Whitby,  Dr. 
Cave,  et  al.  Here  are  the  words  of  some  of  these  illus- 
trious theologians: 

Sc»Tus — "Baptism  ought  to  be  given  by  dipping;  so  as  that  it  is  not 
lawful  to  give  it  otherwise,  unless  for  some  necessary  or  creditable  and 
reasonable  cause." 

Vasquez  says  of  sprinkling : 

That  it  is  not  at  all  in  use,  and  so  can  not  be  practiced  without  sin, 
unless  for  some  particular  cause. 

MEDr; — "There  was  no  such  thing  as  sprinkling,  or  rantiswio*,  used 
in  baptism  in  the  apostles'  times,  nor  many  ages  after  them." 

Knatchbull — "  With  leave  be  it  spoken,  I  am  still  of  opinion  that 
it  would  be  more  for  the  honor  of  the  Church,  and  for  the  (peace  and) 
security  of  religion,  if  tlie  old  custom  could  conveniently  be  restored." 

Dr.  Whitby — "  It  were  to  be  wished  that  this  custom  (of  immersion) 
might  be  again  of  general  use." 

Dr.  Cavk — "The  almost  constant  and  universal  custom  of  the  primi- 
tive times." 


456 


HISTORY  OF  SPRINKLING. 


Dr.  Towerson,  as  a  churchman,  after  reciting  the 
arguments  in  favor  of  immersion,  is  candid  enough,  in 
his  expHcation,  to  make  the  following  remarkable  con- 
cession : 

How  to  take  off  the  force  of  these  arguments  altogether,  is  a  thing 
I  mean  not  to  consider  ;  partly  because  our  Church  seems  to  persuade 
such  an  immersion,  and  partly  because  I  can  not  but  think  the  fore- 
mentioned  arguments  to  be  so  far  of  force  as  to  evince  the  necessity 
thereof,  where  there  is  not  some  greater  necessity  to  occasion  an  alter- 
ation of  it. 

As  to  the  introduction  and  progress  of  sprinkling, 
the  Edinburgh  Cyclopaedia  gives  the  following  account : 

The  first  law  of  sprinkling  was  obtained  in  the  following  manner: 
Pope  Stephen  II.,  being  driven  from  Rome  by  Adolphus,  King  of  the 
Lombards,  in  7-53,  fled  to  Pepin,  who,  a  short  time  before,  had  usurped 
th«  crown  of  France.  Whilst  he  remained  there,  the  monks  of  Cressy, 
in  Britany,  consulted  him  whether,  in  case  of  necessity,  baptism 
poured  on  the  head  of  the  infant  would  be  lawful.  Stephen  replied 
that  it  would.  But  though  the  truth  of  this  fact  be  allowed — which, 
however,  some  Catholics  deny — yet  pouring  or  sprinkling  was  admitted 
only  in  cases  of  necessity.  It  was  not  till  the  year  1311  that  the  legis- 
lature, in  a  council  held  at  Ravenna,  declared  immersion  or  sprinkling 
to  be  indifferent.  In  Scotland,  however,  sprinkling  was  never  prac- 
ticed in  ordinary  cases  till  after  the  Reformation  (about  the  middle  of 
the  sixteenth  century).  From  Scotland  it  mado  its  way  into  England 
in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  but  was  not  authorized  in  the  Established 
Church  {Article  on  BaptUm). 

We  shall  next  give  a  history  of  the  introduction  of 
sprinkling  and  pouring  into  England,  Scotland,  and 
finally  into  America.  That  infant  baptism  and  sprink- 
ling are  sinful  and  inexcusable  innovations  upon  the 
ancient  order  of  things,  are  facts  that  are  not  only  made 
manifest  by  the  absolute  silence  of  the  Scriptures,  but 
facts  that  are  made  doubly  manifest  by  the  apologies 
and  excuses  of  the  innovators,  as  well  as  by  those  who 
support  the  innovators. 


HISTORY  OF  SPRINKLING  CONTINUED. 


We  continue  the  history  of  sprinkling,  according  to 
the  elaborate  testimony  of  Dr.  Wall,  one  of  the  most 
able  and  erudite  writers  of  the  pedobaptist  side  of  the 
house.  He  devoted  four  quarto  volumes  to  this  subject. 
We  quote : 

France  seems  to  have  been  the  first  country  in  the  world  where  bap- 
tism by  afEusion  was  used  ordinarily  to  persons  in  health,  and  in  the 
public  way  of  administering  it.  They  [the  assembly  of  divines  at 
Westminster]  reformed  the  font  into  a  basin.  This  learned  assembly 
could  not  remember  that  fonts  to  baptize  in  had  been  always  used  by 
the  primitive  Christians  long  before  the  beginning  of  Popery,  and 
ever  since  churches  were  built;  but  that  sprinkling  for  the  common 
use  of  baptizing  was  really  introduced  (in  France  first,  and  then  in 
other  Popish  countries)  in  times  of  Pdpery.  And  that  accordingly, 
all  those  countries  in  which  the  usurped  power  of  the  Pope  is,  or  has 
formerly  been,  owned,  have  left  off  dipping  or  children  in  the  font; 
but  that  all  other  countries  in  the  world,  which  had  never  regarded 
his  authority,  do  still  use  it:  and  that  basins,  except  in  case  of  neces- 
sity, were  never  used  by  Papists,  or  any  other  Christians  whatsoever, 
till  by  themselves.  What  has  been  said  of  this  custom  of  pouring  or 
sprinkling  water  in  the  ordinary  use  of  baptism,  is  to  be  understood 
only  in  reference  to  these  western  parts  of  Europe;  for  it  is  used 
■ordinarily  nowhere  else.  The  Greek  Cluirch,  in  all  the  branches  of 
it,  does  still  usr  ijnmersion  ;  and  they  hardly  count  a  child,  except  in 
case  of  sickness,  well  baptized  without  it.  And  so  do  all  other  Chris- 
tians in  the  world  except  the  Latins.  That  which  I  hinted  before,  is 
a  rule  that  does  not  fail  in  any  particular  tiiat  I  know  of,  viz.:  All  the 
nations  of  Christians  that  do  now,  or  formerly  did,  submit  to  the 
authority  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  do  ordinarily  baptize  their  infants 
by  pouring  or  sprinkling  ;  and  though  the  English  received  not  this 
custom  till  after  the  decay  of  Pofiery,  yet  they  have  since  received  it 
from  such  neighboring  uations  as  had  begun  in  the  time  of  the  Pope's 

(457) 


45S 


HISTORY  OF  SPRINKLING  CONTINUED. 


power.  Bui  all  other  Christians  in  the  world,  who  never  owned  the 
Pope's  usurped  power,  do,  and  ever  did,  dip  their  infants  in  the 
ordinary  use  (History  of  Infant  Baptism,  Part  II.,  chap.  ii.). 

Bishop  Burnet's  reason  for  the  change  is  thus 
expressed:  "The  danger  of  dipping  in  cold  climates 
may  be  a  very  good  reason  for  changing  the  form  of 
baptism  to  sprinkHng "  (vol.  iv. ,  p.  162).  Bishop 
Burnet  was  a  member  of  the  Church  of  England.  As 
we  intend  thorough  work  in  the  investigation  of  this 
subject,  and  as  we  desire  our  readers  to  have  the  full 
benefit  of  the  testimony  of  the  most  prominent  pedo- 
baptist  authorities,  we  quote  Dr.  Wall's  argument  on 
the  necessity  of  a  return  from  sprinkling  to  dipping,  as 
he  argued  on  various  occasions : 

That  our  climate  is  no  colder  than  it  was  for  those  thirteen  or  four- 
teen hundred  years  from  the  beginning  of  Christianity  here  to  Queen 
Elizabeth's  time;  and  not  near  so  cold  as  Muscovy,  and  some  other 
countries,  where  they  do  still  dip  tlieir  children  in  baptism,  and  tind 
no  inconvenience  in  it. 

That  the  apparent  reason  that  altered  the  custom  was,  not  the  cold- 
ness of  the  climate,  but  the  imitation  of  Calvin  and  the  Church  •£ 
Geneva,  and  some  others  thereabout. 

That  our  reformers  and  compilers  of  the  liturgy  (even  of  the  last 
edition  of  it)  were  of  another  mind.  As  appears  both  by  the  express 
o»^er  of  the  rubric  itself,  and  by  the  prayer  just  used  before  baptism, 
"  Sanctify  this  water,"  etc.,  "  and  grant  that  this  child  to  be  baptized 
therein,"  etc;  (if  they  had  meant  that  pouring  should  have  always,  or 
most  ordinarily,  have  been  used,  they  would  have  said  therewith;)  and 
by  the  definition  given  in  the  catechism  of  the  outwapd  visible  sign  in 
baptism:  "  Water  wherein  the  person  is  baptized;  "  I  know  that  in  one 
edition  it  was  said,  "Is  dipped  or  sprinkled  with  it."  I  know  not  the 
history  of  that  edition;  but  as  it  is  a  late  one,  so  it  was  not  thought  tit 
to  be  continued.  The  old  edition  had  the  prayer  before  said  in  these 
words,  "  baptized  in  this  water." 

That  if  it  be  the  coldness  of  the  air  that  is  feared;  a  child  brought 
in  loose  blankets,  that  may  be  presently  put  off  and  on,  nepd  be  no 
longer  naked,  or  very  little  longer,  than  at  its  ordinary  dressing  and 
undressing;  not  a  quarter  or  sixth  part  of  a  minute. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


459 


If  the  coldness  of  the  water,  there  is  no  reason,  from  the  nature  of 
the  thing;  no  order  or  command  of  God  or  man,  that  it  should  be  used 
cold;  but  as  the  waters  in  which  our  Savior  and  the  primitive  Chris- 
tians, in  those  hot  countries  which  the  Scripture  mentions,  were  bap- 
tized, were  naturally  warm  by  reason  of  the  climate,  so  if  ours  be 
made  warm,  they  will  be  the  liker  to  them.  As  the  inward  and  main 
part  of  baptism  is  God's  washing  and  sanctifying  the  soul,  so  the  out- 
ward symbol  is  the  washing  of  the  body,  which  is  as  naturally  done  by 
waon  water  as  cold.  It  may,  I  suppose,  be  used  in  such  a  degree  of 
warmth  as  the  parents  desire. 

As  to  those  of  the  clergy  who  are  satisfied  themselves,  and  do  in 
their  own  minds  and  opinions  approve  of  the  directions  of  the  liturgy, 
and  would  willingly  bring  their  people  to  the  use  of  it,  it  is  too 
apparent  what  difficulty  lies  in  the  way.  So  that  this  quarreler  has  no 
ground  in  his  assuming  way  to  demand  "why  they  do  continue,"  etc. 

The  difficulty  of  breaking  any  custom  which  has  got  possession 
among  the  body  of  the  people  (though  that  custom  be  but  of  two  or 
three  generations),  is  known  and  obvious.  And  there  being  a  neces- 
sity of  leaving  it  to  the  parents'  judgment  whether  their  child  may 
well  endure  dipping  or  not,  they  are  very  apt  to  think  or  say  not;  and 
there  is  no  help  for  it.  For  none,  I  think,  will  pretend  that  the  min- 
ister should  determine  that,  and  dip  the  child  whether  they  will  or 
not  He  can  but  give  his  opinion  :  the  judgment  must  be  theirs;  and 
they  are  for  doing  as  has  been  of  late  usual.  But  there  are,  besides 
this  general,  two  particular  obstacles,  which  it  may  be  fit  to  mention  : 

1.  One  is,  from  that  part  of  the  people  in  any  parish  who  are  Pres- 
byterianly  inclined.  As  the  Puritan  party  brought  in  this  alteration, 
so  they  are  very  tenacious  of  it;  and  as  in  other  church  matters,  so  in 
this  particularly,  they  seem  to  have  a  settled  antipathy  against  the 
retrieving  of  the  ancient  customs.  Calvin  was,  I  think,  (as  I  said  in 
my  book)  the  lirst  in  the  world  that  drew  a  form  of  liturgy  that  pre- 
scribed pouring  water  on  the  infant,  absolutely,  without  saying  any- 
thing of  dipping.  It  was  (as  Mr.  Walker  has  sliown)  his  admirers  in 
England,  who,  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  brought  pouring  in  ordinary 
use,  which  before  was  used  only  to  weak  children.  But  the  succeed- 
ing Presbyterians  in  England,  about  the  year  1644  (when  their  reign 
began)  went  farther  yet  from  the  ancient  way,  and  instead  of  pouring, 
brought  into  use  in  many  places  sprinkling  :  declaring  at  the  same 
time  against  all  use  of  fonts,  baptisteries,  godfathers,  or  anything  that 
looked  like  the  ancient  way  of  ba;)tizing.  And  as  they  brought  the 
■■e  of  the  other  sacrament  to  a  great  and  shameful  infrequency  (which 


460 


HISTORY  OF  SPRINKLING  CONTINUED. 


it  is  found  difficult  to  tliis  day  to  reform),  so  they  brought  this  of  bap- 
tism into  a  great  disregard.  Now  I  say,  a  minister  in  a  parish,  where 
there  are  any  considerable  number  inclined  this  way,  will  find  in  them 
a  great  aversion  to  this  order  of  the  rubric.  They  are  hardly  pre- 
vailed on  to  leave  off  that  scandalous  custom  of  having  their  children, 
though  never  so  well,  baptized  out  of  a  basin  or  porringer  in  a  bed- 
chamber ;  hardly  persuaded  to  bring  them  to  church  ;  much  further 
from  having  them  dipped,  though  never  so  able  to  endure  it. 

2  Another  struggle  will  be  with  the  midwives  and  nurses,  etc. 
These  will  use  all  the  interest  they  have  with  the  mothers  (which  is 
very  great)  to  dissuade  them  from  agreeing  to  the  dipping  of  the 
child.  I  know  no  particular  reason  unless  it  be  this  :  A  thing  which 
they  value  themselves  and  their  skill  much  upon  is,  the  neat  dressing 
of  the  child  on  the  christening  day;  the  setting  all  the  trimmings,  the 
pins  and  the  laces  in  the  right  order.  And  if  the  child  be  brought  in 
loose  clothes,  which  presently  may  be  taken  off  for  the  baptism,  and 
put  on  again,  this  j>ride  is  lost.  And  this  makes  a  reason.  So  little 
is  the  solemnity  of  the  sacrament  regarded  by  many,  who  mind  noth- 
ing but  the  dress  and  the  eating  and  drinking.  But  the  minister  must 
endeavor  to  prevail  with  some  of  his  people  who  have  the  most  regard 
for  religion,  and  possibly  their  example  may  bring  in  the  rest. 

We  could  quote  much  more  from  this  author,  but 
this  will  suffice.  What  further  need  have  we  of  proof? 
Here  is  a  pedobaptist  witness  who  testifies  to  the  intro- 
duction of  an  innovation  upon  the  divine  order  as 
unscriptural  as  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  auric- 
ular confession,  purgatory,  celibacy,  or  the  worship  of 
images.  Dr.  Wall  declares  that  "the  custom  is  of 
but  two  or  three  generations"  duration,  and  that  the 
change  was  made  "in  imitation  of  Calvin  and  the 
church  of  Geneva."  He  calls  immersion  the  "ancient 
way,"  the  "ancient  custom,"  "the  ancient  way  of  bap- 
tizing," etc.  He  says  "they  [of  Queen  Elizabeth's  time, 
when  Presbyterianism  became  predominant]  brought 
this  of  baptism  into  great  disregard^  Sprinkling  he 
terms  a  "scandalous  custom."  Episcopalians,  as  we 
understand  their  teaching,  do  not  practice  sprinkling. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


but  they  practice  pouring  upon  the  heads  of  infants. 
Why  their  tirade  against  sprinkHng,  when  pouring  is 
just  as  unscriptural  and  as  unauthorized  as  sprinkling? 
We  challenge  the  world  to  show  where,  either  in  the 
Old  or  in  the  New  Testament,  the  sprinkling  or  pouring 
of  unmixed  water  upon  the  head  of  a  person  ever 
stood  connected,  in  any  sense,  with  the  salvation  of  a 
soul.  He  who  attempts  this  thing  will  find  his  infer- 
ences just  as  faint  as  his  premises  are  vague  and  mean- 
ingless. 

The  testimony  is  undeniably  irrefragable,  that  for  the 
space  of  thirteen  hundred  years  from  the  apostolic  age, 
immersion  was  universally  practiced,  with  very  rare 
exceptions,  as  we  have  already  shown.  Since  that 
time,  license  was  granted  first  by  the  Pope,  in  131 1,  to 
practice  affusion  with  the  authority  of  the  Church. 
Calvin  next  gave  a  law  to  the  Presbyterian  Church 
authorizing  the  same  unscriptural  custom.  This  was 
conveyed  first  into  Scotland,  and  then  into  England, 
after  the  reign  of  bloodthirsty  Queen  Mary.  It  was 
finally  imposed  upon  the  people,  much  against  their 
own  conviction  and  inclination  in  the  beginning.  In  the 
course  of  time  the  people  yielded  to  the  inevitable  and 
received  the  ecclesiastical  yoke.  The  following  comical 
law  once  prevailed  in  the  Commonwealth  of  Virginia : 

Copy  of  a  Law  found  in  Henning's  Statutes  at  Large,  Vol.  2, 
PAGE  165,  December,  1662,  14th,  Charles  II. 

Article  III. — Against  persons  that  refuse  to  have  their  children 
baptiEed. 

Whereas,  Many  schismatical  persons,  out  of  their  averseness  to  the 
orthodox  established  religion,  or  out  of  the  new-fangled  conceits  of 
their  own  heretical  inventions,  refuse  to  have  their  children  baptized  ; 

Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  authority  of  the  aforesaid,  that  all  persons 
that,  in  contempt  of  the  divine  sacrament  of  baptism,  shall  refuse. 


463  HISTORY  OF  SPklNKLING  CONTINUED. 


when  fhej  maj  carry  their  child  to  a  lawful  minister  in  that  county, 
to  have  them  baptized,  shall  be  amerced  (fined)  in  two  thousand 
poonds  of  tobacco — halfe  to  the  informer,  and  halfe  to  the  publique. 

Tobacco,  at  that  time,  was  legal  tender.  The  subject 
is  less  tender  than  it  used  to  be. 


HISTORY  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM  CONTINUED. 


That  the  New  Testament  is  absolutely  silent  as 
respects  infant  baptism,  is  demonstrated  beyond  the 
shadow  of  a  doubt  by  the  concurrent  testimony  of  the 
great  majority  of  the  most  eminent  pedobaptist  writers 
of  modern  times.  We  are  entirely  willing  to  rest  the 
denial  of  infant  baptism  upon  the  admissions  of  pedo- 
baptists  themselves,  without  quoting  one  syllable  from 
immersionists.  Some  of  the  reasons  for  practicing  infant 
baptism  will  be  found  in  the  quotations  which  we  make 
below.  It  will  be  noticed  that  no  argument  is  offered, 
and  that  no  Scripture  is  presented  in  support  of  the 
dogma ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  it  will  be  noticed  that  the 
sinful  innovation  is  based  entirely  on  the  most  remote 
inferences. 

CuBCEiii^DS — "The  custom  of  baptizing  infants  did  not  begin 
before  the  third  age  after  Christ  was  born.  In  the  former  ages  no  trace 
of  it  appears.  ...  It  was  introduced  without  the  command  of 
Christ,  and,  therefore,  this  rite  (infant  baptism)  is  observed  by  us  as 
an  ancient  cuetom,  but  not  as  an  apostolical  tradition." 

OiiSHAuSEN — "There  is  altogether  wanting  any  conclusive  proof- 
passage  for  the  baptism  of  children,  in  the  age  of  the  apostles,  nor  can 
any  necessity  for  it  be  deduced  from  the  nature  of  baptism." 

Db.  Leonard  Wood — Infant  Baptism — "  Whatever  may  have  been 
the  precepts  of  Christ,  or  of  his  apostles,  to  those  who  enjoyed  their 
personal  instructions,  it  is  plain  that  there  is  no  express  precept 
respecting  infant  baptism  in  our  sacred  writings.  The  proof,  then, 
that  infant  baptism  is  a  divine  institution,  must  be  made  out  in  another 
way.  ...  I  can  by  no  means  admit,  as  I  intimated  in  a  previous 
lecture,  that  the  New  Testament  does  not  contain  anything  which 

(463) 


464 


HISTORY  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM  CONTINUED. 


fairly  implies  infant  baptism.  Still,  it  is  evident  that  infant  baptism 
is  not  introduced  as  a  subject  of  particular  discussion  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament;  that  it  is  neither  explicitly  enjoined  nor  prohibited,  and  that 
neither  the  practice  of  baptizing  children  n:)r  the  absence  of  such  a 
practice  is  expressly  mentioned  "  (pp.  11  and  lO'i). 

Georg  Eduard  Stutz,  D.D. — (SchaflP-Hertzog  Encyclopedia — Arti- 
cle on  Baptism)  — "There  is  no  trace  of  infant  baptism  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. All  attempts  to  deduce  it  from  the  words  of  inspiration,  or 
from  such  passages  as  1  Cor.  i.  16,  must  be  given  up  as  arbitrary. 
Indeed,  1  Cor.  vii.  14,  '  For  the  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified  in 
the  wife,  and  the  unbelieving  wife  is  sanctified  in  the  husband  ;  else 
were  your  children  unclean,  but  now  are  they  holy,'  rules  out  decis- 
ively all  such  deductions ;  for,  if  pedobaptism  were  taught  by  Paul, 
he  would  have  linked  the  salvation  of  the  children  with  their  baptism, 
and  not  with  the  faith  of  their  parents.  .  .  .  Sponsors  probably 
were  unknown  before  the  existence  of  infant  baptism  ;  with  them  also 
came  in  a  special  liturgy.  ...  In  the  Early  Church  preparation 
preceded  baptism.  .  .  .  Tertullian,  De  JBapt.,  chap,  xx.,  says : 
'  They  who  are  about  to  enter  baptism  ought  to  pray,  .  .  .  with 
the  confession  of  bygone  sins.'  .  .  .  Great  emphasis  was  early  laid 
upon  baptism.  It  was  the  condition  of  salvation — -it  gave  pardon  of 
sin  and  imparted  righteousness.  .  .  .  However  correct  may  have 
been  the  views  of  the  leaders  of  the  Church,  it  is  certain  that  the 
church-members  entertained  very  erroneous  notions.  They  ascribed 
to  baptism  a  magical  efficacy,  and  particularly  the  cleansing  from  sin, 
entirely  irrespective  of  the  religious  state  of  the  recipient ;  indeed, 
from  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century  the  sad  custom  too  widely 
prevailed  of  postponing  baptism  as  jOng  as  possible,  even  to  the  death 
hour,  so  that  the  recipient  might  continue  his  lax  life,  and  by  this  one 
act  get  rid  of  all  the  past  sins  and  enter  heaven  perfectly  pure. 
Baptism  was  considered  indispensable  to  salvation.  .  .  .  Infant 
baptism  came  in  quite  naturally  as  the  consequent  of  the  belief  in  the 
necessity  of  baptism." 

Eev.  a.  T.  Bledsoe,  D.D.,  LL.D. — "It  is  an  article  of  our  faith 
(Methodist  Episcopal)  that  the  baptism  of  young  children  (infants)  is 
in  any  wise  to  be  retained  in  the  Church,  as  most  agreeable  to  th« 
institution  of  Christ.  But  yet,  with  all  our  searching,  we  have  been 
unable  to  find  in  the  New  Testament  a  single  express  declaration  or 
word  in  favor  of  infant  baptism.  We  justify  the  rite,  therefore,  solely 
©n  the  ground  of  logical  inference,  and  not  on  any  express  word  of 
Christ  or  his  apostles.    This  may,  perhaps,  be  deemed  by  some  of  our 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


465 


readers  a  strange  position  for  a  pedobaptist.  It  is,  by  no  means,  liow- 
ever,  a  singular  opinion.  Hundreds  of  learned  pedobaptists  have 
come  to  the  same  conclusion,  especially  since  the  New  Testament  has 
been  subjected  to  a  closer,  more  conscientious,  and  more  candid  exe- 
gesis than  was  formerly  practiced  by  coutroversialists.  In  Knapp's 
Theology,  for  example,  it  is  said  :  '  There  is  no  decisive  example  of 
thi8  practice  in  the  New  Testament ;  for  it  may  be  objected  against 
those  passages  where  the  baptism  of  the  whole  families  is  mentioned, 
(viz.:  Acts  x.  42-48  .  xvi.  15-33;  1  Cor.  i.  16)  that  it  is  doubtful 
whether  there  were  any  children  in  those  families,  and  if  there  were, 
whether  they  were  then  baptized.  From  the  passage  Matt,  xxviii.  19, 
it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  Christ  commanded  infant  baptism 
{the  mathetemate  is  neither  for  nor  against)  ;  nor  does  this  follow  any 
more  from  John  iii.  5  and  Mark  x.  14-16.  There  is,  therefore,  no 
express  command  for  infant  baptism  found  in  the  New  Testament,  as 
Morus  (p  215  ^  12)  justly  concedes'  (vol.  ii.,  p.  524).  Dr.  Jacob  also 
Bays  '  However  reasonably  we  may  be  convinced  that  we  find  in  the 
Ciiristian  Scriptures  the  fundamental  idea  from  which  infant  baptism 
was  afterward  developed,  and  by  which  it  may  now  be  justified,  it 
ought  to  be  distinctly  acknowledged  that  it  is  not  an  apostolic  ordi- 
nance.' In  like  manner,  or  to  the  same  effect,  Neander  says  :  '  Origin- 
ally baptism  was  administered  to  adults  •  nor  is  the  general  spread  of 
infant  baptism,  at  a  later  period,  any  jiroof  to  the  contrary ;  for  even 
after  infant  baptism  had  been  set  forth  as  an  apostolic  institution,  its 
introduction  into  the  general  practice  of  the  Church  was  but  slow. 
Had  it  rested  on  apostolic  authority,  there  would  have  been  a  difficulty 
in  explaining  its  late  approval,  and  that,  even  in  the  third  century,  it 
was  opposed  by  at  least  one  eminent  fattier  of  the  Church  '  (p.  229). 

"We  quote  this  jiassage,  not  because  its  logic  does,  in  every  respect, 
carry  conviction  to  our  mind,  but  simply  to  show  how  completely 
Neander  concedes  the  point,  that  infant  baptism  is  not  an  apostolic 
ordinance.  We  might,  if  necessary,  adduce  the  admission  of  many 
other  profoundly  learned  pedobaptists  that  their  doctrine  is  not  found 
in  the  New  Testament,  eitlier  in  express  terms,  or  by  implication  from 
any  portion  of  its  language." — Southern  Review,  Vol.  XtV. 

Now  let  us  hear  from  the  renowned  H.  A.  W.  Meyer, 
Th.  D.,  a  celebrated  expositor  of  the  Bible,  of  the 
Lutheran  Church,  whose  praise  is  everywhere  spoken 
by  the  learned  world,  and  a  man  whom  his  coadjutors 


31 


466  HISTORY"  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM  CONTINUED. 


delight  to  honor  as  the  "prince  of  exegetes."  Com- 
menting on  Acts  xvi.  15,  he  says  : 

Of  what  members  her  family  (Lydia's)  cousisted  can  not  be  deter* 
mined.  This  passage  and  verse  33,  with  xviii.  S,  1  Cor.  i.  16,  are 
appealed  to  in  order  to  prove  infant  baptism  in  the  apostolic  age,  or  at 
least  to  make  it  probable.  .  .  .  But  on  this  question  the  following 
remarks  are  to  be  made  : 

1.  If,  in  the  Jewish  and  Gentile  families  which  were  converted  to 
Christ,  there  were  children,  their  baptism  is  to  be  assumed  in  those 
cases  when  they  were  so  far  advanced  that  they  could  and  did  confess 
their  faith  on  Jesus  as  the  Messiali ;  for  this  was  the  universal,  abso- 
lutely necessary  qualification  for  the  reception  of  bajjtism. 

2.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  there  were  children  still  incapable  of  con- 
fessing, baptism  could  not  be  administered  to  those  in  whom  that 
which  was  the  necessary  pre-supposition  of  baptism  for  Christian  sanc- 
tification  was  still  wanting. 

3.  Such  young  children,  whose  parents  were  Christians,  rather  fell 
under  the  point  of  view  of  1  Cor.  vii.  14,  according  to  which,  in  con- 
formity with  the  view  oL  the  Apostolic  Church,  the  children  of  Chris- 
tians were  no  longer  regarded  as  akathartoi  (unclean),  but  as  hagaoi 
(holy),  and  that  not  on  the  footing  of  having  received  the  character  of 
holiness  by  baptism,  but  as  having  part  in  the  Christian  hagiotes  by 
their  fellowship  with  their  Christian  parents.  .  .  .  Besides,  the 
circumcision  of  children  must  have  been  retained  for  a  considerable 
time  among  the  Jewish  Christians,  according  to  xxi.  21.  Therefore, 

4.  The  baptism  of  the  children  of  Christians,  of  which  no  trace  is 
found  in  the  New  Testament,  is  not  to  be  held  as  an  apostolic  ordi- 
nance, as,  indeed,  it  encountered  early  and  long  resistance  ;  but  it  is 
an  institution  of  the  Church,  which  gradually  arose  in  post-apostolic 
times,  in  connection  with  the  development  of  ecclesiastical  life  and  of 
doctrinal  teaching,  not  certainly  attested  before  TertuUian,  and  by  him 
still  decidedly  opposed  ;  and,  although  already  defended  by  Cyprian, 
only  becoming  general  after  the  time  of  Augustine,  in  virtue  of  that 
connection.  Yet,  even  apart  from  the  ecclesiastical  premises  of  a 
stern  doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  of  the  devil,  going  beyond  Scripture, 
from  which  even  exorcism  arose,  the  continued  maintenance  of  infant 
baptism,  as  the  objective  attribution  of  spiritually  creative  grace  in 
virtue  of  the  plan  of  salvation  established  for  every  individual  in  the 
fellowship  of  the  Church,  is  so  much  more  justified,  as  this  objective 
attribution  takes  place  with  a  view  to  the  future  subjective  appropria- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


467 


tiOD.  And  this  subjective  appropriation  iias  so  necessarily  to  emerge 
with  the  development  of  self-consciousness  and  of  knowledge  through 
faith,  that  in  default  thereof  the  Church  would  have  to  recognize  in 
the  baptized  no  true  members,  but  only  membra  mortua  (dead  members). 
This  relation  of  connection  with  creative  grace,  in  so  far  as  the  Church 
is  its  sphere  of  operation,  is  a  theme  which,  in  presence  of  the  attacks 
of  Baptists  and  rationalists,  must  overstep  the  domain  of  exegesis,  and 
be  worked  out  in  that  of  dogmatics,  yet  without  the  addition  of  con- 
firmation as  any  sort  of  supplement  to  baptism. 

Let  us  hear  Dean  Stanley,  one  of  the  great  modern 
theological  lights  of  the  Church  of  England,  whose  hon- 
esty no  pedobaptist  will  doubt,  and  whose  statements 
no  scholar  will  dispute.    He  says  : 

Another  change  is  not  so  complete,  but  is  perhaps  more  important. 
In  the  apostolic  age,  and  in  the  three  centuries  which  followed,  it  is 
evident  that,  as  a  general  rule,  those  who  came  to  baptism  came  in  full 
age,  and  of  their  own  deliberate  choice.  We  find  a  few  cases  of  the 
baptism  of  children  ;  in  the  third  century  we  find  one  case  of  the  bap- 
tism of  infants.  Even  amongst  Christian  households  the  instances  of 
Chrysostom,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Basil,  Ephrem  of  Edessa,  Augustine, 
Ambrose,  are  decisive  proofs  that  it  was  not  only  not  obligatory,  but 
not  usual.  They  had  Christian  parents,  and  yet  they  were  not  bap- 
tized till  they  reached  maturity.  The  liturgical  service  of  baptism  was 
framed  entirely  for  full-grown  converts,  and  it  is  only  by  considerable 
adaptation  applied  to  the  case  of  infants.  Gradually,  however,  the 
practice  spread,  and  after  the  fifth  century  the  whole  Christian  world. 
East  and  West,  Catholic  and  Protestant,  Episcoj)al  and  Presbyterian 
(with  the  single  exception  of  the  sect  of  the  Baptists  before  mentioned), 
have  baptized  children  in  their  infancy.  Whereas,  in  the  early  ages, 
adult  baptism  was  the  rule,  and  infant  baptism  the  exception ;  in  later 
times  infant  baptism  is  the  rule,  and  adult  baptism  the  exception. 
What  is  the  justification  of  this  almost  universal  departure  from  the 
primitive  usage?  There  may  have  been  many  reasons,  some  bad, 
some  good. 

In  his  apology  for  infant  baptism.  Dean  Stanley  says : 
"The  substitution  of  infant  baptism  for  adult  baptism, 
like  the  change  from  immersion  to  sprinkling,  is  thus  a 
triumph  of  Christian  charity."    He  should  have  said, 


468  HISTORY  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM  CONTINUED. 

"  A  triumph  of  priestly  arrogance  and  prelatic  impiety ! " 
We  have  quoted  from  Stanley's  essay  on  "Baptism," 
as  it  was  published  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  for  OctO« 
ber,  1879. 


-THE- 

Argument  of  Concession 


THIRD  PART. 


The  Argumeijt  of  Concessioij. 


IMMERSION  THE  ONLY  APOSTOLIC  BAPTISM. 


We  furnish  proofs  from  eminent  pedobaptist  authors 
who  have  conceded  that  immersion  was  the  only  mode 
known  and  practiced  by  the  apostles  as  connected  with 
the  Great  Commission.  A  proposition  proved  beyond 
a  peradventure,  by  its  enemies,  certainly  should  stand 
forever  impregnable.  We  shall  proceed  to  give  our 
pedobaptist  authorities,  whose  testimony  none  dare  call 
in  question. 

MOSHEIM — Church  History,  First  Century. — "The  sacrament  of  bap- 
tism was  administered  in  this  century,  without  the  public  assemblies,  in 
places  appointed  and  prepared  for  that  purpose,  and  was  performed 
by  an  immersion  of  the  whole  body  in  the  baptismal  font." 

Of  baptism  in  the  second  century  he  says: 

"The  persons  that  were  to  be  baptized,  after  they  had  repeated  the 
creed,  confessed  and  renounced  their  sins,  and  particularly  the  devil 
and  his  pompous  allurements,  were  immersed  under  water,  and  received 
into  Christ's  kingdom"  (Maclaine's  Translation,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  126,  206). 

Mosheim  was  an  eminent  Lutheran  scholar,  and  was 
Chancellor  and  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  University 
of  Gottingen. 

Neander — Church  History. — "In  respect  to  the  form  of  baptism,  it 
was,  in  conformity  with  the  original  institution,  and  the  original  import  of 
the  symbol,  performed  by  immersion,  as  a  sign  of  entire  baptism  into  the 
Holy  Spirit — of  being  entirely  penetrated  by  the  same"  (Vol.  I.,  p.  310). 

(471) 


4/2         IMMERSION  THE  ONLY  APOSTOLIC  BAPTISM. 

In  his  "  History  of  the  Planting  and  Training  of  the 
Church,"  the  same  writer  says: 

"  Baptism  was  originally  administered  hy  i;;uuersIon,  and  many  of 
the  comparisons  of  Paul  allude  to  this  form  of  administration." 

In  an  appendix  to  "Judd's  Review  of  Stuart"  is  a 
note  from  Neander,  in  which  he  says: 

As  to  your  question  on  the  original  rite  of  baptism,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  whatever  that,  in  the  primitive  times,  the  ceremony  was  per- 
formed by  immersion,  to  signify  a  complete  immersion  into  the  new  prin- 
ciple of  life  divine,  which  was  to  be  imparted  by  the  Messiah.  When 
Paul  says  that  through  baptism  we  are  buried  with  Christ  and  rise 
again  with  him,  he  unquestionably  alludes  to  the  symbol  of  dipping 
into,  and  rising  again  out  of,  the  water.  The  practice  of  immersion  in 
the  first  century  was,  beyond  all  doubt,  preiaknt  in  the  whole  Church. 

As  a  scholar,  Neander  stands  confessedly  in  the  first 
rank  of  church  historians.  The  simple  and  single  fact 
that  he  was  a  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  University 
of  Berlin  thirty-eight  years  attests  his  learning  and  his 
competency  as  a  witness  to  the  work. 

AuGUSTi — Archaeology. — "  Immersion  in  water  was  general  until  the 
thirteenth  century  among  the  Latins.  It  was  then  displaced  by  sprink- 
ling, but  retained  by  the  Greeks." 

Augusti  was  an  eminent  Lutheran  scholar  in  the 
University  of  Bonn ;  a  man  of  acknowledged  scholar- 
ship, and,  of  course,  a  competent  witness  to  the  truth, 

GiESELER — Church  History. — "For  the  sake  of  sick  the  rite  of  sprink. 
ling  was  introduced." 

This  renowned  pedobaptist  was  also  a  professor  in  the 
University  of  Bonn,  and  a  member  of  the  Lutheran 
Church. 

Kurtz — Church  History  -"  Ba,pt\sm  was  administered  hy  complete 
immersion." 

Dr.  Kurtz,  a  professor  in  the  University  of  Dorpat, 
is,  among  pedobaptists,  a  trustworthy  witness. 


FF.FORMATORV  MOVEMENTS. 


473 


Van  Collen — History  of  Doctrines. — "  Immersion  in  water  was  gen- 
eral until  the  thirteenth  century." 

Winer — Christian  Antiquities — "Affusion  was  at  first  applied  only  to 
the  sick,  but  was  gradually  introduced  for  others  after  the  seventh  cen- 
tury, and  in  the  thirteenth  became  the  prevailing  practice  in  the  West. 

Db.  Brenner — History  of  Baptism. — "Thirteen  hundred  years  was 
baptism  generally  .  .  .  performed  by  the  immersion  of  the  person 
under  water ;  and  only  in  extraordinary  cases  was  sprinkling,  or  affu- 
sion, permitted.  These  latter  methods  of  baptism  were  called  in 
question  and  even  prohibited." 

Bower — History  of  Popes. — '  Baptism  by  immersion  was,  undoubt- 
edly, the  apostolic  practice,  and  was  never  dispensed  with  by  the 
Church  except  in  cases  of  sickness." 

Bishop  Bossuet — Stennet  and  Russen. — "We  are  able  to  make  it 
appear,  by  the  acts  of  councils  and  by  ancient  rituals,  that  for  thirteen 
hundred  years  baptism  was  administered  (by  immersion)  throughout  the 
whole  Church,  as  far  as  possible." 

Stackhotjse — History  of  the  Bible. — "We  nowhere  read  in  the 
Scripture  of  any  one  being  baptized  but  by  immersion,  and  several 
authors  have  proved,  from  the  acts  of  councils  and  ancient  rituals, 
that  this  manner  of  immersion  continued,  as  much  as  possible,  to  be 
used  for  thirteen  hundred  years  after  Christ." 

Dr.  Philip  Schaff — History  Apostolic  Church. — "Immersion,  and 
not  sprinkling,  was  unquestionably  the  original  normal  form.  This  is 
shown  by  the  very  meaning  of  the  Greek  words,  baptizo,  baptisma,  and 
the  analogy  of  the  baptism  of  John,  which  was  performed  in  the 
Jordan  {en),  Matt.  iii.  6;  compare  with  16;  also  eis  to  Jordanen  (into 
the  Jordan),  Matt.  i.  9.  Furthermore,  by  the  New  Testament  com- 
parisons of  baptism  with  the  passage  through  the  Red  Sea  (1  Cor.  x. 
2);  with  the  flood  (1  Pet.  iii.  21);  with  a  bath  (Eph.  v.  20;  Titus  iii. 
•5);  with  a  burial  and  resurrection  (Rom.  vi.  4;  Col.  ii.  12);  and  finally, 
by  the  general  usage  of  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  which  was  always  immer- 
sion, as  it  is  to  this  day  in  the  Oriental  and  also  in  the  (jrseco-Russian 
Churches,  pouring  and  sprinkling  being  substituted  only  in  cases  of 
urg(!nt  necessity,  such  as  sickness  and  approaching  death." 

Dr.  Schaff  is  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the  Reformed 
Church  in  America;  his  profound  scholarship,  both  as  a 
historian  and  as  a  philologist,  is  recognized,  both  in 
Europe  and  America,  by  the  most  eminent  scholars  in 


474 


IMMERSION  THE  ONLY  APOSTOLIC  BAPTISM. 


£ill  orthodox  churches.  His  "History  of  the  Christian 
Church"  is  one  of  the  best  ever  written,  and  as  a  scrip- 
tural exegete  he  has  few  peers.  Surely,  such  testimony 
as  he  candidly  presents  should  be  accepted  as  final  on 
the  subject  of  immersion. 

Vexesa — Eeciesiastieal  History. — '"It  is  wiihout  controversy  that 
baptism,  in  the  primitive  Church,  was  administered  bv  imjMrsion  into 
K^Uer,  and  not  by  sprinkling,  seeing  that  John  is  said  to  have  baptized 
in  Jordan,  and  where  there  was  much  water,  as  Christ  also  did,  bv  his 
disciples,  in  the  neighborhood  of  these  places.  Philip,  going  down 
into  the  water,  baptized  the  etinuch." 

Hagexbach — History  Ckriitian  Chwch. — • '  That  baptism,  in  the 
beginning,  was  adm^inistered  in  the  open  air,  in  rivers  and  pools,  or 
tliat  it  was  bv  immerfion,  we  know  from  the  narratives  in  the  New 
Testament.  In  later  times  there  were  prepared  great  baptismal  fonts, 
or  chapels.  The  person  to  be  baptized  descended  sevtral  steps  into 
the  reservoir  of  water,  and  then  the  uhoU  body  vas  immerged  under  the 
vcUt." 

Waddlsgtos — Church  History. — "The  sacraments  of  the  primitive 
Chorch  were  two — that  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  eere- 
moriy  of  immersion,  the  oldest  form  of  Ijaptism,  was  performed  in  the 
name  of  the  three  persons  of  the  Trinity." 

CouEitAK — Ancvent  Hisiory. — "In  the  primitive  Church  immersion 
was  undeniably  the  common  mode  of  baptism.  This  fact  is  so  well 
established  that  it  trere  needkis  to  adduce  authorities  in  proof  of  it.  It  is  a 
great  mistake  to  suppose  that  baptism  by  immersion  was  discontinued 
wiien  infant  baptism  became  generally  prevalent.  The  practice  of 
immersion  continued  even  unto  the  thirteerdh  or  fourteenth  century.  Indeed, 
it  has  never  been  formally  abandoned,  but  is  still  the  mode  of  admin- 
istering infant  baptism  in  the  Greek  Church,  and  in  sever»l  other 
churches." 

Dr.  Walx — History  Truant  Baptism.  — '  •  This  (immersion)  is  so  plain 
and  clear  by  an  infinite  number  of  passages,  that  one  can  not  btd  pity  the 
waJ:  endeaxors  of  such  pedobaptists  as  xcoxdd  maintain  the  negatiK  of  it.  .  .  . 
The  custom  of  the  Christians  in  the  near  succeeding  times  (to  the 
apostles),  being  more  largely  and  particularly  delivered  in  books,  is 
known  to  have  been  generally,  or  ordinarily,  a  total  immersion." 

Dr.  Wall  was  for  fifty-two  years  (1676-1728)  vicar  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


475 


Shoreham,  Kent;  was  a  member  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, and,  among  other  works,  he  pubhshed  "  Infant 
Baptism  Asserted  and  Vindicated,"  and"  History  of 
Infant  Baptism,  in  Two  Parts."  Hence  his  concessions 
have  great  weight. 

Bishop  Smith  —History  of  Baptism  We  have  only  to  go  back  six 
or  eight  hundred  years  and  immersion  was  the  only  mode,  except  in  the 
case  of  the  few  baptized  on  their  beds  at  the  real  or  supposed  approach 
of  death.  .  .  .  Immersion  was  not  only  universal  six  or  eight  hun- 
dred years  ago,  but  it  was  primitive  and  apostolic.  .  .  .  The  bowl 
and  sprinkling  are  strictly  Genevan  in  their  origin  ;  that  is,  they  were 
introduced  by  Calvin  at  Geneva." 

Dr..  Gkorge  Gregory — History  of  Church. — "  The  initiatory  rite  of 
baptism  (in  the  first  century)  was  publicly  performed  by  immersing 
the  whole  body." 

BiNOHAM — Origines — "As  this  (dipping)  was  the  original  apostolic 
practice,  so  it  continued  the  universal  practice  of  the  Church  for  many 
years." 

Bingham  was  one  of  the  most  laborious  and  highly 
educated  men  that  the  Church  of  England  ever  pro- 
duced : 

Dr.  Cave — Primitive  Christianity. — "The  party  to  be  baptized  was 
wholly  immersed,  or  put  under  water,  whereby  they  did  more  notably 
and  significantly  express  the  three  great  ends  and  effects  of  baptism." 

Magdeburg  Cent. — "They  (the  apostles)  baptized  only  adults. 
As  to  the  baptism  of  infants,  w«  have  no  example.  As  to  the  man- 
ner of  baptizing,  it  was  by  dipping  or  plunging  into  the  water." 

Dr.  George  Christian  Knapp — Christian  Tlieology. — 'To  baptisma, 
from  baptizim,  which  properly  signifies  to  immerse  (like  the  German 
tat^en),  to  dip  in,  to  wash  (by  immersion).  Immersion  is  peculiarly 
agreeable  to  the  institution  of  Christ  and  to  the  practice  of  the  apos- 
tolical church  ;  and  so  even  John  baptized,  and  immersion  remained 
common  a  long  time  after,  except  that,  in  the  third  century,  or  per- 
haps earlier,  the  baptism  of  the  sick  (baptisma  clinicorum)  was  performe<i 
by  sprinkling,  or  affusion.  Still,  some  would  not  acknowledge  this  to 
be  true  baptism,  and  controversy  arose  concerning  it — so  unheard-of 
was  it  at  that  time  to  baptize  by  simple  affusion.    Cyprian  first 


476         IMMERSION  THE  ONLY  APOSTOLIC  BAPTISM. 

defended  baptism  by  sprinkling,  when  necessity  called  for  it,  but  cau. 
tiously  and  with  much  limitation.  By  degrees,  however,  this  mode  of 
biiptism  became  more  customary — probably  because  it  was  more  con- 
venient. Especially  was  this  the  case  after  the  seventh  century  and  in 
thc'Western  Church,  but  it  did  not  become  universal  until  the  com- 
mencement of  the  fourteenth  century." 

Dr.  Knapp  was  one  of  the  most  popular  of  modern 
Lutheran  theologians.  His  "Lectures  on  Theology," 
from  which  the  above  passage  is  quoted,  was  translated 
by  Dr.  Leonard  Woods,  Jr.,  President  of  Bowdoin 
College,  and  seventeen  years  ago  the  work  had  reached 
the  twentieth  edition. 


PEDOBAPTIST  AUTHORITIES  CONTINUED. 


As  this  is  an  age  of  searching  investigation  and  thof- 
ough  criticism,  and  as  honest  and  intelligent  men  are 
not  inclined  to  believe  without  testimony,  we  proceed 
with  our  inductive  argument,  which  is  made  conclusive 
by  the  testimonials  of  the  most  eminent  pedobaptist 
authorities. 

Dr.  Whitby — "  Immersion  was  religiously  observed  by  all  Chris- 
tians for  thirteen  centuries,  and  was  approved  by  the  Church  of  England. 
And  since  the  change  of  it  into  sprinkling  was  made  without  any  allow- 
ance from  the  Author  of  the  institution,  or  any  license  from  any  Council  of 
the  Church  (of  England),  being  that  which  the  Romanist  still  urgeth 
to  justify  his  refusal  of  the  cup  to  the  laity,  it  were  to  be  wished  that 
this  custom  (immersion)  might  be  again  of  general  use. 

Dr.  Whitby  belonged  to  the  Church  of  England.  He 
was  a  distinguished  preacher  and  author,  and  died  in 
1726. 

Dr.  Qeikie — "  With  the  call  to  repent,  John  united  a  significant  rite 
for  all  who  were  willing  to  own  their  sins  and  promise  amendment  of 
life.  It  was  the  new  and  striking  requirement  of  baptism  which  John 
had  been  sent  by  divine  appointment  to  introduce." 

As  the  testimony  of  Dr.  Geikie,  being  a  profound 
scholar  and  historian,  and  still  living,  is  of  more  import- 
ance than  all  the  testimony  of  little  sectarian  preachers 
combined,  we  shall  quote  him  at  some  length.  He 
says,  in  his  "  Life  of  Christ  "  : 

The  Mosaic  ritual  had,  indeed,  required  washings  and  purifications, 
but  they  were  mostly  personal  acts  for  cleansing  from  ceremonial  defile- 
ments, and  were  repeated  as  often  as  uncleanness  demanded.  But 

(477) 


478  PEDOBAPTIST  AUTHORITIES  CONTINUED. 


baptism  was  performed  only  once,  and  those  who  sought  it  had  to 
receive  it  irom  the  hands  of  John.  The  old  rites  and  requirements  of 
the  Pharisees  would  not  content  him.  A  new  symbol  was  needed, 
striking  enough  to  express  the  vastness  of  the  change  he  demanded, 
and  to  form  its  fitting  beginning,  and  yet  simple  enough  to  be  easily 
applied  to  the  whole  people  ;  for  all,  alike,  needed  to  break  with  the 
past  and  to  enter  upon  the  life  of  spiritual  effort  he  proclaimed.  .  .  . 
Washing  had  been  in  all  ages  used  as  a  religious  symbol  and  significant 
rite.  Naaman's  leprosy  had  been  cleansed  away  in  the  waters  of  the 
Jordan.  The  priests  in  the  temple  practiced  constant  ablutions,  and 
others  were  required  daily  from  the  people  at  large,  to  remove  cere- 
monial impurity.  David  had  prayed,  "  Wash  me  from  mine  iniquity." 
Isaiah  had  cried,  "  Wash  you,  make  you  clean,  put  away  the  evil  of 
your  doings."  Ezekiel  had  told  his  countrymen  to  "  Wash  their 
hearts  from  wickedness."  .  .  .  Ablution  in  the  East  is  indeed,  of 
itself,  almost  a  religious  duty.  The  dust  and  heat  weigh  upon  the 
spirits  and  heart  like  a  load  ;  its  removal  is  refreshment  and  happiness. 
It  was,  hence,  nearly  impossible  to  see  a  convert  go  down  into  a 
stream,  travel-worn  and  soiled  with  dust,  and,  after  disappearing  for  a 
moment,  emerge  pure  and  fresh,  without  feeling  that  the  symbol 
suited  and  interpreted  a  strong  craving  of  the  human  heart.  It  was 
no  formal  rite  with  John.    .    .  . 

On  baptism  itself  he  set  no  mysterious  sacramental  value. 
No  one  could  receive  it  until  he  had  proved  his  sincerity  by  an  hum- 
ble public  confession  of  his  sins.    Baptism,  then,  became  a  moral 
vow,  to  show,  by  a  better  life,  that  the  change  of  heart  was  genuine. 

Bathing  in  the  Jordan  had  been  a  sacred  symbol,  at  least  since  the 
days  of  Naaman,  but  immersion  by  one  like  John,  with  the  strict  and 
humbling  confession  of  sin,  sacred  vows  of  amendment,  and  hope  of 
forgiveness,  if  they  proved  lasting,  and  all  this  in  preparation  for  the 
Messiah,  was  something  wholly  reetc  in  Israel.  It  marked,  in  a  most 
striking  way,  the  wonderful  moral  revolution  which  had  taken  place  in 
the  hearts  of  the  people. 

Wholly  self-oblivious,  tainted  by  no  stain  of  human  pride,  self -con- 
sciousness or  low  ambition,  John  had  felt  it  no  usurpation  to  constitute 
himself  the  messenger  predicted  by  Malachi,  "  sent  to  prepare  the  way 
of  the  Lord."  .  .  .  The  crowds  saw  in  him  the  most  unbending 
strength,  united  with  the  most  complete  self-sacrifice  ;  a  type  of  grand 
fidelity  to  God  and  his  truth,  and  of  the  lowliest  self-denial.  The  sor- 
rows and  hopes  of  Israel  seemed  to  shine  out  of  his  eyes — bright  with 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


479 


the  inspiration  of  his  soul,  but  sad  with  the  greatness  of  his  work — as 
he  summoned  the  crowds  to  repentance,  alarmed  them  by  words  ot 
terror,  or  led  them  in  groups  to  the  Jordan  and  immersed  each  singly  in 
tts  waters,  after  earnest  and  full  confession  of  their  sins. 

John  resisted  no  longer,  and,  leading  Jesus  into  the  stream,  the  rite 
was  performed.  Can  we  question  that  such  an  act  was  a  crisis  in  the 
life  ot  our  Lord?  His  perfect  manhood,  like  that  of  other  men,  in  all 
things  except  sin,  forbids  our  doubting  it.  Holy  and  pure  before  sink- 
'  ing  under  the  waters,  he  yet  must  have  risen  from  them  with  the  light  of  a 
higher  glory  in  his  countenance.  His  past  life  was  closed  ;  a  new  era 
had  opened.  Hitherto  the  humble  villager,  veiled  from  the  world,  he 
was  iienceforth  the  Messiah,  openly  working  among  men.  It  was  tlie 
true  moment  of  his  entrance  on  a  new  life.  Past  years  had  been  buried 
in  the  waters  of  the  Jordan.  He  entered  them  as  Jesus  the  Son  of 
man ;  he  rose  from  them  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God. 

Dean  Stanley — "  Baptism,"  in  the  Nineteenth  Century 
for  October,  1879: 

What,  then,  was  baptism  in  the  apostolic  age  ?  It  coincided  with 
the  greatest  religious  change  which  the  world  has  yet  witnessed.  Mul- 
titudes of  men  and  women  were  seized  with  one  common  impulse,  and 
abandoned,  by  the  irresistible  conviction  of  a  day,  an  hour,  a  moment, 
their  former  habits,  friends,  associates,  to  be  enrolled  in  a  new  society, 
under  the  banner  of  a  new  faith.  That  new  society  was  intended  to 
be  a  society  of  "brothers";  bound  by  ties  closer  than  any  earthly 
brotherhood — tilled  with  life  and  energy  such  as  fall  to  the  lot  of  none 
but  the  most  ardent  enthusiasts,  yet  tempered  by  a  moderation,  a  wis- 
dom and  a  holiness  such  as  enthusiasts  have  rarely  possessed.  It  was, 
moreover,  a  society  swayed  by  the  presence  of  men  whose  words  even 
now  cause  the  heart  to  burn,  and  by  the  recent  recollections  of  One 
whom,  "not  seeing,  they  loved  with  love  unspeakable."  Into  this 
society  they  passed  by  an  act  as  natural  as  it  was  expressive.  The 
plunge  into  the  bath  of  purification,  long  known  among  the  Jewish 
nation  as  a  symbol  of  a  change  of  life,  was  still  retained  as  the  pledge 
of  entrance  into  this  new  and  universal  communion — retained  under 
the  sanction  of  Him  into  whose  name  they  were  by  that  solemn  rite 
'  baptized."  In  that  early  age  the  scene  of  the  transaction  was  either 
some  deep  wayside  spring  or  well,  as  for  the  Ethiopian,  or  some  rush- 
ing river,  as  the  Jordan,  or  some  vast  reservoir,  as  at  Jericho  or  Jeru- 
salem, whither,  as  in  the  Baths  of  Caracalla  at  Rome,  the  whole 


480  FEDOBAPTIST  AUTHORITIES  CONTINUED. 


population  resorted  for  swimming  or  washing.  The  water  in  those 
Eastern  regions,  so  doubly  significant  of  all  that  was  pure  and  refresh- 
ing, closed  over  the  heads  of  the  converts,  and  they  rose  into  the  light 
of  heaven,  new  and  altered  beings.  It  was  natural  that  on  such  an 
act  were  lavished  all  the  figures  which  language  could  furnish  to 
express  the  mighty  change:  "Regeneration,"  "Illumination," 
"Burial,"  "Resurrection,"  "A  new  creation,"  "Forgiveness  of 
sins,"  "Salvation."  Well  might  the  apostle  say,  "  Baptism  doth  even 
now  save  us,"  even  had  he  left  this  statement  in  its  unrestricted 
strength  to  express  what  in  that  age  no  one  could  misunderstand.  But 
no  less  well  was  he  led  to  add,  as  if  with  a  prescience  of  coming  evil : 
"Not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good 
conscience  toward  God." 

We  quote  again  from  the  same  essay: 

This  leads  us  to  the  second  characteristic  of  the  act  of  baptism. 
"Baptism  "  was  not  only  a  bath,  but  a  plunge — an  entire  submersion 
in  the  deep  water,  a  leap  as  into  the  rolling  sea  or  the  rushing  river, 
where  for  a  moment  the  waves  closed  over  the  bather's  head,  and  he 
emerges  again  as  from  a  momentary  grave  ;  or  it  was  the  shock  of  a 
shower-bath— the  rush  of  water  passed  over  the  whole  person  from 
capacious  vessels,  so  as  to  wrap  the  recipient  as  within  the  veil  of  a 
splashing  cataract.  This  was  the  part  of  the  ceremony  on  which  the 
apostles  laid  so  much  stress.  It  seemed  to  them  like  a  burial  of  the 
old  former  stlf  and  the  rising  up  again  of  the  new  self.  So  St.  Paul 
compared  it  to  tlie  Israelites  passing  through  the  deep  waters  of  the 
flood.  "We  are  buried,"'  said  vSt.  Paul,  "with  Christ  by  baptism  at 
his  death  ;  that,  like  as  Christ  was  raised,  thus  we  also  should  walk  in 
the  newness  of  life."  Baptism,  as  the  entrance  into  the  Christian 
society,  was  a  complete  change  from  the  old  superstitions  or  restrictions 
of  Judaism  to  the  freedom  and  confidence  of  the  gospel.  It  was  a 
complete  change  from  the  idolatries  and  profligacies  of  the  old  heathen 
world  to  the  light  and  parity  of  Christianity.  It  was  a  change  effected 
only  by  the  same  effort  and  struggle  as  that  with  which  a  strong  swim- 
mer or  an  adventurous  diver  throws  himself  into  the  stream  and 
struggles  with  the  waves,  and  comes  up  with  increased  energy  out  of 
the  depths  of  the  dark  abyss. 

This,  too,  is  a  lesson  taught  by  baptism  which  still  lives,  although 
the  essence  of  the  material  form  is  gone.  There  is  now  no  disappear- 
ance as  in  a  watery  grave.  There  is  now  no  conscious  and  deliberate 
choice  made  by  the  eager  convert  at  the  cost  of  cruel  partings  from 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


friends,  perhaps  of  a  painful  death.  It  is  but  the  few  drops  sprinkled, 
a  ceremony  undertaken  long  before  or  long  after  the  adoption  of 
Christianity  has  occurred.  But  the  thing  signified  by  the  ancient  form 
still  keeps  before  us  that  which  Christians  were  intended  to  be.  This 
is  why  it  was  connected  both  in  name  and  substance  with  conversion. 
In  the  Early  Church  the  careful  distinction  which  later  times  have 
made  between  baptism,  regeneration,  conversion  and  repentance 
did  not  exist.  They  all  meant  the  same  thing.  In  the  apostolic  age 
they  were,  as  we  have  seen,  combined  with  baptism.  There  was  no 
waiting  till  Easter  or  Pentecost  for  the  great  reservoir,  when  the  cate- 
chumens met  the  bishop— the  river,  the  wayside  well,  were  taken  the 
moment  the  convert  was  disposed  to  turn,  as  we  say,  the  new  leaf  in 
his  life.  And  even  afterward,  in  the  second  century,  regeneration 
(paliggenesia),  which  gradually  was  taken  to  be  the  equivalent  of  bap- 
tism, was,  in  the  first  instance,  the  equivalent  of  repentance  and  con- 
version. 

We  have  quoted  at  length  from  this  representative 
man  of  the  Church  of  England  and  of  the  pedobaptist 
world.  He  was  an  eminent  historian  of  the  Christian 
as  well  as  of  the  Jewish  religion,  and  was  a  man  of  pro- 
found learning.  This  being  so,  the  honest  reader  and 
searcher  after  the  truth  naturally  asks  this  question, 
"Why,  then,  did  he  concede  immersion  to  be  exclus- 
ively practiced  in  the  apostolic  age,  and  for  the  first 
three  centuries  of  the  Christian  Era,  while  he  at  the 
same  time  rejected  this  apostolic  practice,  and  substitu- 
ted sprinkling  and  pouring?"  We  shall  allow  Dean 
Stanley  to  answer  this  question  in  his  own  language, 
and  to  give  his  reasons  for  changing  this  divine  institu- 
tion to  a  human  institution.    He  says : 

The  reason  of  the  change  is  obvious.  The  practice  of  immersion, 
apostolic  and  primitive  as  it  itas,  was  peculiarly  suitable  to  the  Southern 
and  Eastern  countries  for  which  it  was  designed,  and  peculiarly  unsuit- 
able to  the  tastes,  the  convenience  and  the  feelings  of  the  countries  of 
the  North  and  West.  Not  by  any  decree  of  Council  or  Parliament, 
but  by  the  general  consent  of  Christian  liberty,  this  great  change  was 
effected.    Not  beginning  till  the  thirteenth  century,  it  has  gradually 

32 


482 


PEDOBAPTIST  AUTHORITIES  CONTIM  liD. 


driven  the  ancient  Catholic  usage  out  of  the  whole  of  Europe.  Ther« 
is  no  one  who  would  now  wish  to  go  back  to  the  old  practice. 

The  man  who  writes  in  this  irreverent  and  disjointed 
style  can  not  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of 
God,  or  that  God  delegated  to  him  absolute  authority 
over  all  nations,  or  that  men  are  saved  by  submitting  to 
the  positive  commands  of  the  Son  of  God.  We  quote 
a  little  further : 

It  had  no  doubt  the  sanction  of  the  apostles  and  of  their  Master.  It 
had  tlie  sanction  of  the  venerable  churches  of  the  early  ages,  and  of 
the  sacred  countries  of  the  East.  Baptism  by  sprinkling  was  rejected 
by  the  whole  ancient  church  (except  in  the  rare  caseg  of  death-beds  or 
extreme  necessity)  as  no  baptism  at  all.  Almost  the  first  exception 
was  the  heretic  Novatian.  It  still  has  the  sanction  of  the  powerful 
religious  community  which  numbers  among  its  members  such  noble 
characters  as  John  Bunyan,  Eobert  Hall  and  Havelock.  In  a  version 
of  the  Bible  which  the  Baptist  Church  has  compiled  for  its  own  use 
in  America,  where  it  excels  in  numbers  all  but  the  Methodists,  it  is 
thought  necessary,  and  on  philological  grounds  it  is  quite  correct,  to 
translate  John  the  Baptist  by  John  the  Immerser.  It  has  been 
defended  on  sanitary  grounds.  Sir  John  Floyor  dated  the  prevalence 
of  consumption  to  the  discontinuance  of  baptism  by  immersion.  But 
speaking  generally,  the  Christian  civilized  world  has  decided  against 
it.  It  is  a  striking  example  of  the  triumph  of  common  sense  and  con- 
venience over  the  bondage  of  form  and  custom. 

The  fact  is,  such  men  as  Dean  Stanley  practically 
deny  the  divinity  and  authority  of  Jesus  Christ,  by  sub- 
stituting their  "tastes,"  and  " convenience  diwd  feelings," 
for  the  positive  injunctions  of  the  Son  of  God.  What 
he  styles  "Christian  liberty,"  by  his  own  showing 
originated  in  an  apostate  condition  of  the  Church,  in 
the  Dark  Ages,  where  no  inspired  men,  as  the  apostles, 
were  present  to  infallibly  guide  the  people.  Stanley, 
with  his  ilk  of  the  Church  of  England,  is  the  last  person 
who  should  contemptuously  speak  of  "the  bondage  o{ 
form  and  custom,"  in  view  of  the  stiff  and  starchy  ritual- 


RH.FOKMATOKV  MOVEMENTS. 


ism  of  that  Church.  When  he  says  that  "  the  Christian 
civihzed  world  has  decided  against  it,"  he  should  prop- 
erly say  "that  an  apostate  Church,  semi-infidel  and 
semi-rational,  has  decided  against  it." 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  ENCYCLOPEDIAS, 


"Out  of  thine  own  mouth  I  shall  condemn  thee.** 


We  now  give  the  testimony  of  the  encyclopedias : 

Encyclopedia  Bkitannica. — Article,  Baptism. — "  Christian  bap- 
tism is  the  sacrament  by  which  a  person  is  initiated  into  the  Christian 
Church.  The  word  is  derived  from  the  Greek,  baptizo — the  frequenta- 
tive form  of  bapto,  to  dip  or  vash.  The  usual  way  of  performing  the 
ceremony  was  by  immersion.  In  the  case  of  sick  persons  [clinici)  the 
minister  was  allowed  to  baptize  by  pouring  water  upon  the  head,  or  by 
sprinkling.  In  the  Early  Church  '  clinical'  baptism,  as  it  was  called, 
was  only  permitted  in  cases  of  necessity,  but  the  practice  of  baptism 
by  sprinkling  gradually  came  in,  in  spite  of  the  opposition  of  councils 
and  hostile  decrees.  The  Council  of  Ravenna,  1311,  was  the  first 
Council  of  the  Church  which  legalized  baptism  by  sprinkling,  by  leav- 
ing it  to  the  choice  of  the  ofEciating  minister." 

Encyclopedia  Americana. — Article,  Baptism. — "  Baptism  (that  is, 
dipping,  immersing,  from  the  Greek  baptizo)  was  usual  with  the  Jews 
even  before  Christ.  In  the  time  of  the  apostles  the  form  of  baptism 
was  very  simple.  The  person  to  be  baptized  was  dippea  in  a  river,  or 
vessel,  with  the  words  which  Christ  had  ordered,  and,  to  express  more 
fully  his  change  of  character,  generally  adopted  a  new  name." 

Metropolitan  Encyxlopedia. — Article,  Baptism. — "We  readily 
admit  that  the  literal  meaning  of  the  word  'baptism'  is  immersion,  anO 
that  the  desire  of  resorting  again  to  the  most  ancient  practice  of  the 
Church,  of  immersion  of  the  body,  which  has  been  expressed  by  manj 
divines,  is  well  worthy  of  being  considered." 
Verily,  we  should  think  so. 

Penny  Encyclopedia. — Artick,  Baptism. — "  The  manner  in  which 
it  (baptism)  was  first  performed,  appears  to  have  been  hj  immersion.'^ 

Chambers'  Encyclopedia. — Article,  Baptism.—"  It  is,  however, 
indisputable  that,  in  the  Primitive  Church,  the  ordinary  mode  of  bap- 

(484) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


485 


^ism  was  by  immersion,  in  order  to  which  baptisteries  began  to  be 
erected  in  the  third,  perhaps  in  the  second,  century  ;  and  the  sexes 
were  nsually  baptized  apart.  But  baptism  was  administered  to  sick 
persons  by  sprinkling,  although  doubts  as  to  the  complete  efficacy  of 
tliis  clinic  (sick)  baptism  were  evidently  prevalent  in  the  time  of 
Cyprian,  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century.  Baptism  by  sprinkling 
gradually  became  more  prevalent,  but  the  dispute  concerning  the 
mode  of  baptism  became  one  of  the  irreconcilable  difiFerences  between 
the  Eastern  and  the  Western  churches,  the  former  generally  adhering 
to  the  practice  of  immersion,  while  the  latter  adopted  the  mere  pouring 
of  water  on  the  head,  or  sprinkling  on  the  face;  which  practice  has 
generally  prevailed  since  the  thirteenth  century,  but  not  universally,  for 
it  was  the  ordinary  practice  in  England,  before  the  Reformation,  to 
immerse  infants,  and  the  fonts  in  the  churches  were  made  large  enough 
for  this  purpose.  This  continued  to  be  the  practice  until  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  and  the  change  which  then  took  place  is  ascribed  to  the 
English  divines,  who  had  sought  refuge  in  Geneva  and  other  places  on 
the  Continent  during  the  reign  of  Mary." 

Edinburgh  Encyclopedia. — Article,  Baptism,.— "The  first  law  to 
sanction  aspersion  as  a  mode  of  baptism  was  by  Pope  Stephen  II.,  A. 
D.  733.  But  it  was  not  till  the  year  1311  that  a  Council,  held  at 
jRavenna,  declared  immersion  or  sprinkling  to  be  indififerent.  In  this 
country,  however  (Scotland),  sprinkling  was  never  practiced  in  ordi- 
nary cases  tiU  after  the  Reformation  ;  and  in  England,  even  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  VI.,  immersion  was  commonly  observed.  Those 
Scottish  exiles,  who  had  renounced  the  authority  of  the  Pope,  implic- 
itly acknowledged  the  authority  of  Calvin,  and,  returning  to  their  own 
country,  with  John  Knox  at  their  head,  in  1559,  established  sprinkling 
in  Scotland. 

From  Scotland  it  made  its  way  into  England  in  the  reign  of  Eliza- 
beth, but  was  not  authorized  by  the  Established  Church.  In  the 
Assembly  of  Divines,  held  at  Westminster  in  1643,  it  was  keenly 
debated  whether  immersion  or  sprinkling  should  be  adox)ted:  twenty-five 
voted  for  sprinkling  and  twenty-four  for  imnm-sion ;  and  even  that  small 
majority  was  attained  at  the  earnest  request  of  Dr.  Lightfoot,  who 
liad  acquired  great  influence  in  the  Assembly." 

Article,  Baptisteries. — "Baptisteries  were  anciently  very  capacious, 
because,  as  Dr.  Cote  observes,  the  stated  times  of  baptism  returning 
biit  seldom,  there  were  usually  great  multitudes  to  be  baptized  at  the 
same  time  ;  and  then,  the  manner  of  baptizing  by  immersion,  or  dipping 
under  the  water,  made  it  necessary  to  have  a  large  font." 


486  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  ENCYCLOPEDIAS. 


Nationai>  Cyclopedia. — Article,  Baptism. — "  The  inaiiner  in  wliiclr 
the  rite  was  performed  appears  to  have  been  at  first  by  complete  immer- 
sion." 

Ree's  Cyclopedia. — Article,  Baptism.  "  In  primitive  times  this 
ceremony  was  performed  by  immersion." 

Brand's  Cyclopedia. — Article,  Baptism. — "Baptism  wa«  originally 
administered  by  immersion,  which  act  is  thought  by  some  neceesarv  tu 
the  sacrament." 

Encyclopedia  Ecclesiastica.  —  Article,  Baptism.  —  "Whatever 
weight,  however,  may  be  in  these  reasons,  as  a  defense  for  the  present 
practice  of  sprinkling,  it  is  evident  that  during  the  first  agee  of  the 
Church,  and  for  many  centuries  afterward,  the  practice  of  immersioii 
prevailed." 

Schaff-Herzog  Encyclopedia  of  Religious  Knowledge. — 
Article,  Baptism. — "  In  the  Primitive  Churcli,  baptism  was  by  immer- 
sion, except  in  the  case  of  the  sick  (clinic  baptism),  who  were  baptized 
by  pouring  or  sprinkling.  These  latter  were  often  regarded  as  not 
properly  baptized,  either  because  they  had  not  completed  their  cate- 
chumenate,  or  the  symbolism  of  the  rite  was  not  fuUy  observed,  or 
because  of  the  small  amount  of  water  necessarily  used.  [The  twelfth 
canon  of  the  Council  of  Neo-Csesarca  (314-325)  is:  '  Whoever  has 
received  clinic  baptism  (through  his  own  fault)  can  not  become  a  priest, 
because  he  professed  his  faith  under  pressure  (fear  of  death),  and  not 
from  deliberate  choice,  unless  he  greatly  excel  afterward  in  zeal  and 
faith,  or  there  is  a  deficiency  of  other  eligible  men.' — Hefele,  Concil- 
iengeschicte.  Vol.  I.,  Sec.  17,  first  edition.]  In  A.  D.  816,  the  Council 
of  Calcuith  (Chelsea,  in  England)  forbade  the  priests  to  pour  water 
upon  the  infants'  heads,  but  ordered  to  immerse  them. — Hefele  (Vol. 
IV.,  Sec.  414).  'The  Council  of  Nemours  (1284)  limited  sprinkling 
to  cases  of  necessity,  and  Thomas  Aquinas  {Summa  Theologica,  ^  III., 
Qu.  66,  Art.  7 ,  De  Baptismo)  says :  'Although  it  may  be  safer  to  bap- 
tize by  immersion,  yet  pouring  and  sprinkling  are  also  allowable.' 
The  Council  of  Ravenna  (1311)  was  the  first  to  allow  a  choice  between 
sprinkling  and  immersion  (eleventh  canon,  Hefele,  Vol.  VI.,  Sec. 
669);  but,  at  an  earlier  date  (1287),  the  canons  of  the  Council  of  the 
Liege  Bishop  John  prescribe  the  way  in  which  the  sprinkling  of  chil- 
dren should  be  performed,  ITie  practice  first  came  into  use  ai  the  end  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  and  was  favored  by  the  growing  rarity  of  adult 
baptism.  It  is  the  present  practice  of  the  Roman  Church;  but,  in  the 
Greek  Church,  immersion  is  insisted  on  as  essential.    Ijuther  sided 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


487 


with  the  immersionists,  described  the  baptismal  act  as  an  immersion, 
and  derived  taufe  (German  for  'baptism')  from  tief  ('deep'),  because 
what  one  baptized,  he  sank  tief  in  the  water." 

KiTTo's  Encyclopedia  of  Biblical  LiTf^KAXURE. — Article,  Bap- 
tim. — "Infant  baptism  was  established  neither  by  Christ  nor  the  apos- 
tles. In  all  places  where  we  find  the  necessity  of  baptism  notified, 
either  in  a  dogmatic  or  historical  point  of  view,  it  is  evident  it  was 
only  meant  for  those  who  were  capable  of  comprehending  the  word 
preached,  and  of  being  converted  to  Christ  by  an  act  of  their  own  will. 
A  pretty  sure  testimony  of  its  uon-existence  in  the  apostolic  age  may 
be  inferred  from  1  Corinthians  vii.,  since  Paul  would  certainly  have 
referred  to  the  baptism  of  children  for  their  holiness.  (Compare 
Neander,  'History  of  Planting,'  page  20G.)  But  even  in  later  times, 
several  teachers  of  the  Church,  such  as  Tertullian  {De  Bapt.,  18)  and 
others,  reject  the  custom;  indeed,  his  church  in  general  (that  of  North 
Africa)  adhered  longer  than  the  others  to  the  primitive  regulations. 
Even  when  the  baptism  of  children  was  already  theoretically  derived 
from  the  apostles,  its  practice  was,  nevertheless,  for  a  long  time,  con- 
fined to  a  mature  age." 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  COMMENTATORS. 


We  next  come  to  speak  of  the  symbolism  of  immer- 
sion, or  of  the  allusions  made  in  the  Epistles  to  the 
primitive  practice.    And,  first, 

Albert  Barnes  on  Romans  vi.  4  :  "  'Therefore  we  are  bttried,'  etc. 
It  is  altogether  probable  that  the  apostle,  in  this  place,  had  allusion  to 
the  custom  of  baptizing  bj  immersion.  This  can  not,  indeed,  be 
proved  so  as  to  be  liable  to  no  objection,  but  I  presume  this  is  the  idea 
which  would  strike  the  great  mass  of  unprejudiced  readers." — Notes  on 
Roman*. 

Dr.  Barnes  was  an  eminent  Presbyterian  preacher  and 
commentator.  Baptizing  by  immersion  is  equivalent  to 
immersing  by  immersion,  which  is  a  very  awkward 
expression ;  for  baptizitig  is  the  Greek  word  baptizo 
anglicized. 

Thomas  Chalmers,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  on  Romans  vi.  4  :  "The  original 
meaning  of  the  word  '  baptism '  is  immersion,  and  though  we  r^ard  it 
as  a  point  of  indifferency  whether  the  ordinance  so  named  be  per- 
formed in  this  way  or  by  sprinkling,  yet  we  doubt  not  that  the  preva- 
lent style  in  the  apostles'  days  was  by  an  actual  submerging  of  the 
whole  body  under  water.  We  advert  to  this  for  the  purpose  of  throw- 
ing light  on  the  analogy  that  is  instituted  in  these  verses.  Jesus 
Christ,  by  death,  underwent  this  baptism,  even  immersion  under  the 
surface  of  the  ground,  whence  he  soon  emerged  again  by  his  resurrec- 
tion. We,  by  being  baptized  into  his  death,  are  conceived  to  have 
made  a  similar  translation.  In  the  act  of  descending  under  the  water 
of  baptism,  to  have  resigned  an  old  life  ;  and  in  the  act  of  ascending, 
to  emerge  into  a  second  or  a  new  life,  along  the  course  of  which  it  is 
OUT  part  to  maintain  a  strenuous  avoidance  of  that  sin,  which  as  good 
as  expunged  the  being  that  we  had  formerly,  and  a  strenuous  prose- 
cution of  that  holiness,  which  should  begin  with  the  first  moment  that 
we  are  ushered  into  our  present  being,  and  be  perpetuated  and  make 

(488) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


489 


progress  toward  the  perfection  of  full  and  ripened  immortality." — 
Lectures. 

Dr.  Chalmers  was  a  distinguished  member  of  the 
Free  Church  of  Scotland,  which  he,  with  four  hundred 
other  ministers,  established  in  May,  1843,  after  they 
had  abandoned  the  Established  Church.  He  was 
appointed  Principal  and  Professor  of  Theology  in  the 
Free  Church  College,  which  position  he  held  until  his 
death. 

Archbishop  Tillotson — "  Being  Imried  with  him  in  baptism,  wherein 
also  ye  are  risen  with  him  throwjh  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  who  hath 
rained  him  from  the  dead." 

Buried  with  him  in  baptism.  For  the  full  understanding  of  this  expres- 
sion, we  must  have  recourse  to  that  parallel  text  (Roin.  vi.  3-5),  which 
will  explahi  to  us  the  meaning  of  this  phrase:  ''Know  ye  not  that  so 
many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ  were  baptized  into  his  death  f 
Tf^erefore  u'e  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death :  that  like  as  Christ 
VMS  raved  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should 
walk  in  newness  of  life.  For  if  we  have  been  planted  together  in  the  likeness  of 
his  death,  v;e  shall  be  also  in  the  likeness  of  his  resurrection."  Where  we  see 
that  to  be  baptized  into  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ  is  TO  be  bap- 
tized INTO  THE  siMiLiTtTDE  AND  LIKENESS  OF  THEM  ;  and  the  resem- 
blance is  this :  that  as  Christ,  being  deatl,  was  buried  in  the  grave, 
and,  after  some  stay  in  it,  that  is,  for  three  days,  he  was  raised  again 
out  of  it,  by  the  glorious  power  of  God,  to  a  new  and  heavenly  life, 
being  not  long  after  taken  up  into  heaven  to  live  at  the  right  hand  of 
God  ;  so  Christians,  when  they  were  baptized,  were  immersed  into  the 
water,  .  .  .  their  bodies  being  covered  all  over  with  it ;  which  is 
then  fore  called  our  being  buried  in  baptism  unto  death;  and  after  some 
short  stay  under  water  were  raised  or  taken  up  again  out  of  it,  as  if 
they  had  been  recovered  to  a  new  life,  by  all  which  was  spiritually 
signified  our  dying  to  sin,  and  being  raised  to  a  divine  and  heavenly 
life  through  the  faith  of  tlie  operation  of  God;  that  is,  by  that  divine  and 
supernatural  power  which  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead.  So  that 
Christians  from  henceforth  were  to  reckon  themselves  dead  unto  sin, 
but  alive  unto  God,  through  .Jesus  Christ,  as  the  apostle  speaks 
(Rom.  vi.  11). — Sermon  on  Resurrection  of  Christ. 

If  Archbishop  Tillotson  were  now  alive,  and  would 


490  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  COMMENTATORS. 


talk  in  this  manner,  he  would  be  nicknamed  a  ' '  Camp- 
bellite  "  of  the  first  water  ;  but  since  it  is  a  fact  that  he 
was  a  communicant  of  the  Church  of  England,  there  is 
no  help  in  that  quarter  for  our  pedobaptist  friends;  and 
they  must  nolens  volens  gulp  down  the  unsavory  dose. 

Whitefield  on  Goiiia,ns  vi.  3—4 — "It  is  certain  that  in  the  words 
of  our  text  there  is  an  allusion  to  the  manner  of  baptizing,  which  was 
by  immersing." 

John  Wesley  on  Romans  yi.  4  -  "The  allusion  is  to  the  ancient 
manner  of  baptizing  by  immersion." — lsc\r  Testament  Notes. 

Benson  on  Romans  vi.  4,  "Burled  with  Christ  by  baptism." — 
"Alluding  to  the  ancient  manner  of  baptizing  by  immersion." — Com- 
mentary. 

BLOOMi'iELD  on  Romans  vi.  4 — "Here  is  a  plain  allusion  to  the 
ancient  custom  of  baptizing  by  immersiou,  and  I  agree  with  Koppe  and 
Rosenmuller,  that  there  is  reason  to  regret  that  it  should  have  been 
abandoned  in  most  Christian  churches,  especially  as  it  has  so  evident  a 
reference  to  the  mystic  sense  of  baptism." 

Adam  Clakk,  D.D.,  on  Romans  vi.  4 — "It  is  probable  that  the 
apostle  here  alludes  to  the  mode  of  administering  baptism  by  immer- 
sion, the  whole  body  being  put  under  water." — Commentary. 

CoNYBEARE  AND  HowsoN — "  It  is  needless  to  add  that  baptism  was 
(unless  in  exceptional  cases)  administered  by  immersion,  the  convert 
being  plunged  beneath  the  surface  of  the  water,  to  represent  his  death 
to  the  life  of  sin,  and  then  raised  from  this  momentary  burial,  to 
represent  his  resurrection  to  the  life  of  righteousness.  It  must  be  a 
subject  of  regret  that  the  general  discontinuance  of  this  original  form 
of  baptism  (though,  perhaps,  necessary  in  our  Northern  climates)  has 
rendered  obscure  to  popular  apprehension  some  very  important  pas- 
sages of  Scripture." — Life  arid  Epistles  of  St.  Paul. 

Ulricius  Zwinglitjs  on  Romans  vi.  3-4  -  "When  ye  were  immersed 
into  the  water  of  baptism,  ye  were  engrafted  into  the  death  of  Christ ; 
that  is,  the  immersion  of  your  body  into  water  was  a  sign  that  ye  ought 
to  be  engrafted  into  Christ  and  his  death,  that  as  Christ  died  and  was 
buried,  ye  also  may  be  dead  to  the  flesh  and  the  old  man — that  is,  to 
yourselves." 

Pniiiip  LiMBORCH — On  Baptism — "  Baptism,  then,  consists  in  ablu- 
tion, or  rather,  in  the  immersion  of  the  whole  body  into  water.  For 


REFOKMATOKY  MOVEMENTS. 


491 


formerly  those  who  were  to  be  baptized  were  accustomed  to  be 
immersed  with  the  whole  body  in  water." 

Prof.  J.  A.  Tukretin  on  Romans  vi.  3-4 — "And,  indeed,  baptism 
was  performed  in  that  age  (the  apostolic  age),  and  in  those  countries, 
by  the  immersion  of  the  whole  body  into  water." 

Dr.  James  Macknight  on  Romans  vi.  4 — "  Christ's  baptism  was 
not  the  baptism  of  repentance,  for  he  never  committed  any  sin.  But 
he  submitted  to  be  baptized  ;  that  is,  to  be  buried  under  the  water  by 
John  and  then  raised  out  again,  as  an  emblem  of  his  future  death  and 
resurrection.  In  like  manner  the  baptism  of  believers  is  emblematical 
of  their  own  death,  burial  and  resurrection  (see  Col.  ii.  12).  The 
burying  of  Christ  and  of  believers,  lirst  in  the  water  of  baptism,  and 
afterward  in  the  earth,  is  fitly  enough  compared  to  the  planting  of 
seeds  in  the  earth,  because  the  effect  in  both  cases  is  a  reviviscence  to 
a  state  of  greater  perfection. ' ' — Macknight  on  the  Epistles. 

William  Van  Est  on  Romans  vi  3 — "For  immersion  represents  to 
us  Christ's  burial  and  so  also  his  death.  For  the  tomb  is  a  symbol  of 
death,  since  none  but  the  dead  are  buried.  Moreover,  the  emersion 
which  follows  the  immersion  has  a  resemblance  to  a  resurrection.  We 
are,  therefore,  in  baptism  conformed  not  only  to  the  death  of  Christ, 
as  he  has  just  said,  but  also  to  his  burial  and  resurrection." 

Canon  Farrar,  D.D.,  F.R.S.— Li/e  0/  St.  Paul— "The  life  of  the 
Christian  being  hid  with  Christ  in  God,  his  death  with  Christ  is  a 
death  to  sin,  his  resurrection  with  Christ  is  a  resurrection  to  life.  The 
dippinfj  under  the  waters  of  baptism  is  his  union  with  Christ's  death ;  his 
risijig  out  of  the  waters  of  baptism  is  a  resurrection  with  Christ  and  the 
birth  to  a  new  life  "  (page  480) 

Prof.  F.  Godet,  D.D.,  on  Romans  vi.  3-4 — '  Some  take  the  word 
baptize  in  its  literal  sense  of  bathing,  plunging  and  understand,  '  As 
many  of  you  as  were  plunged  into  Christ.'  .  .  .  One  is  not  plunged 
into  a  name,  but  into  water,  in  relation  to  (eis)  a  name  ;  that  is  to  say,  to 
the  new  revelation  of  God  expressed  in  a  name.'  Modern  commenta- 
tors are  not  at  one  on  the  question  whether  the  apostle  means  to  allude 
to  the  external  form  of  the  baptismal  rite  in  the  Primitive  Church. 
It  seems  to  us  very  probable  that  it  is  so,  whether  primitive  baptism 
be  regarded  as  a  complete  immersion,  during  which  the  baptized  disap- 
peared for  a  moment  under  water  (which  best  corresponds  to  the 
tig^e  of  burial),  oi  whether  the  baptized  went  down  into  the  water  up 
to  his  loins,  and  the  baptizei  poured  the  water  with  which  he  had  filled 
the  hollow  of  his  hands  over  his  head,  so  as  to  represent  an  immersion. 


492 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  COMMENTATORS. 


.  ' .  .  The  relation  between  the  two  facts  of  burial  and  baptism, 
indicated  by  the  apostle,  is  this  :  Burial  is  the  act  which  consummates 
the  breaking  of  the  last  tie  between  man  and  his  earthly  life.  This 
■was  likewise  the  meaning  of  our  Lord's  entombment." 

Professor  Godet  tries  hard  to  make  an  exception,  by 
intimating  that  it  was  a  custom  with  some,  somewhere 
this  side  of  the  apostoHc  age,  to  take  the  candidate  down 
into  the  water  up  to  his  loins  and  then  pour  water  upon 
his  head.  As  he  does  not  positively  assert  that  this 
was  practiced,  we  must  conclude  that  he  simply  indulged 
in  a  fancy.  He  also,  in  the  same  connection,  quoting 
Mark  vii.  4,  says  that  ' '  we  can  not  insist  on  the  sense 
of  plunging  couches  or  divans;"  which  is  a  fact,  for  in 
the  American  Revised  Version  neither  couch,  nor  divan, 
nor  table  is  found.  So  away  goes  that  Gibraltar  of  the 
sprinkling  fraternity.  The  fact  is,  it  is  utterly  impossi- 
ble to  find  a  case  in  all  Bible  history  where  the  sprink- 
ling of  pure,  unmixed  water  stood  connected  with  the 
salvation  of  one  living  soul ! 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  COMMENTATORS  CON- 
TINUED. 


We  proceed  with  our  Argument  of  Concession,  which 
'proves  stronger  and  stronger  as  we  continue  our  cita- 
tions. 

H.  A.  W.  Meyer,  Th.  D.,  on  "  Baptism  of  Jailer."—"  This  (that 
he  led  them  to  a  neighboring  water,  perhaps  in  the  court  of  the  house, 
in  which  his  baptism  and  that  of  his  household  was  immediately  com- 
pleted) is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  baptism  took  place  by  complote' 
immersion,  in  opposition  to  Baumgarten,  page  515,  who,  transferring 
the  performance  of  baptism  to  the  house,  finds  here  an  '  approxima- 
tion to  the  later  custom  of  simplifying  the  ceremony,'  according  to 
which  complete  immersion  did  not  take  place.  Immersion  was,  in 
fact,  quite  an  essential  part  of  the  symbolism  of  baptism"  (Rom.  vi.). — 
Commentary  on  Acts,  Note. 

Dr.  Gloag  says  of  Dr.  Meyer  that  he  is  "  the  greatest 
modern  exegete  "  ;  and  Dr.  Ormiston  says:  "  No  name 
is  entitled  to  take  precedence  of  that  of  Meyer  as  a 
critical  exegete,  and  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  one 
that  equals  him  in  the  happy  combination  of  superior 
learning  with  keen  penetration,  analytical  power  and 
clear,  terse,  vigorous  expression.  ...  So  impartial 
and  candid  is  he,  that  he  never  allows  his  own  peculiar 
views  to  color  or  distort  his  interpretation  of  the  lan- 
guage of  Scripture."  The  testimony  of  such  a  pro- 
found scholar  will  ten  times  outweigh  the  objections  of 
ten  thousand  second  and  third  rate  pedobaptist  preach- 
ers and  editors. 

Dk.  Philip  Schaff,  on  Rom.  vi.  4. — "All  commentators  of  note 
(except  Stuart  and  Hodge)  expressly  admit,  or  take  it  for  granted  that,- 

(493) 


494     TESTIMONY  OF  THE  COMMENTATORS  CONTINUED. 


in  this  veree,  .  .  .  the  ancient  prevailing  mode  of  baptism,  bj 
immeraiou  and  emersion,  is  implied  as  giving  additional  force  to  the 
idea  of  the  going  down  of  the  old  and  the  rising  up  of  the  new  man. 
Bloomfield  :  'There  is  a  plain  allusion  to  the  ancient  mode  of  baptism 
by  Immersion;  on  which,  see  Suicer's  Thes.  and  Bingham  s  Antvjailies.' 
Barnes  'It  is  altogether  probable  that  the  apostle  has  allusion  to  the 
custom  of  baptizing  by  immersion.'  Conybeare  and  Howson:  'This 
passage  can  not  be  understood,  unless  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
primitive  baptism  was  by  immersion.'  Webster  and  Wilkinson: 
'  Doubtless  there  is  an  allusion  to  immersion,  as  the  usual  mode  of 
baptism,  introduced  to  show  that  baptism  symbolized  our  spiritual 
resurrection.'  Compare  also  Bengel,  Riickert,  Tholuck,  Meyer.  The 
objection  of  Philippi  (who,  however,  himself  regards  this  allusion 
probable  in  verse  4),  that,  in  this  case,  the  apostles  would  have 
expressly  mentioned  the  symbolic  act,  has  lo  force  in  view  of  the 
daily  practice  of  baptism." — Commentary  of  Lange,  Note. 

Here  now  we  have  the  irrefutable  testimony  of  such 
witnesses  and  acknowledged  scholars  as  Lange,  Schaff, 
Bloomfield,  Suicer,  Bingham,  Barnes,  Conybeare,  How- 
son,  Webster,  Wilkinson,  Bengel,  Riickert,  Tholuck, 
Meyer,  Philippi,  and  indeed,  all  commentators  of  note — 
except  two— that  in  Rom.  vi.  4  the  apostle  alludes  to 
baptism  by  immersion,  calling  it  a  burial  with  Christ, 
thereby  ' '  giving  additional  force  to  the  idea  of  the 
going  down  of  the  old  and  the  rising  up  of  the  new  man." 

JosriN  Maktyb,  born  A.  D.  140:  "We  represent  our  Lord's  suffer- 
ing by  baptism  in  a  pool." — Adkin»,  page  127. 

Clkment  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  200:  "You  were  led  to  a  bath  as 
Christ  was  conveyed  to  the  sepulchre,  and  were  thrice  immersed,  to 
signify  Christ's  three  days'  burial." — Adldm,  page  127. 

Such  was  the  stress  laid  upon  immersion  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  second  century,  that  both  Tertullian  and 
Clement,  on  the  supposition  that  the  ordinance  pos- 
sessed some  inherent  mystic  power,  introduced  trine 
immersion,  and  which  is  the  first  time  we  hear  of  it. 
Athanasius,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  328:  "To  immerse  u 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMKNTS. 


495 


child  three  times  in  a  pool  or  hath,  and  to  emerse  him  ;  this  shows  the 
death  and  resurrection  of  Christ  on  the  third  da.y.  '—Slitart,  page  148; 
Cvnant,  Ex.  188. 

GiiKOORY  Nyassen,  A.  D.  328-  "Coming  into  water,  the  Icindred 
element  of  earth,  we  hide  ourselves  in  it,  as  the  Savior  did  in  the 
eai'th." — Stuart,  page  147.    "Let  us,  therefore,  be  buried  with  Christ 
in  baptism,  that  we  may  also  rise  with  him    let  us  go  down  with  him, 
,,,that  we  may  also  be  exalted  with  him." — Conant,  Ex.  188. 

Ambrose,  A.  D.  340:  '  You  were  asked,  'Dost  thou  believe  in  God 
AivMiGHTY  ?'  Thou  saidst,  '  I  believe,'  and  thus  thou  wast  immersed 
{mersisti);  that  is,  thou  wast  buried." — Stuart,  page  147. 

Chrysostom,  a.  D.  347:  "To  be  baptized  and  to  submerge,  then  to 
emerge,  as  a  symbol  of  descent  to  the  grave  and  ascent  from  it.  And 
therefore  Paul  calls  baptism  a  burial  when  he  says  :  '  We  are  therefore 
buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death.'" — Westlake,  ch.  3;  Stuart, 
page  147. 

Apostolical  Constitutions,  written  in  the  fourth  century: 
"Immersion  denotes  dying  with  him  (Christ);  emersion  a  resurrection 
with  Christ." — Stuart,  page  148. 

Cyril,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  A.  D.  350;  "Thou  going  down  into 
the  water,  and  in  a  manner  buried  in  the  waters,  as  he  in  the  rock,  art 
raised  again,  walking  in  newness  of  life." — Conant,  Ex.  176.  "Ye 
professed  the  saving  i)rofessiou  and  sunk  down  thrice  into  the  water, 
and  again  came  up,  and  thereby  a  symbol  shadowing  forth  the  burial 
of  Christ." — Conant,  p.  178. 

Basil  the  Great,  Bishop  of  Caesarea,  in  Cappadocia,  A.  D.  370: 
"  By  three  immersions  we  represent  the  death  of  Christ — the  bodies 
of  those  that  are  baptized  are  buried  in  water." — Conant,  Ex.  181. 

Fourth  Council  of  Toledo,  Can.  b:  "The  immersion  in  water, 
as  it  were,  the  descent  into  the  grave  ;  and  the  emersion  from  the  water, 
the  resurrection." — Adkins,  page  128. 

Photius.  "  The  three  immersions  and  emersions  of  baptism  signify 
death  and  resurrection." — Stuart,  page  148. 

GELAsrue:  "The  three  immersions  and  emersions  of  baptism  signify 
death  and  the  resurrection." — Adkins,  page  129. 

Gregory:  "  The  three  immersions  and  emersions  signify  death  and 
the  resurrection,"  ut  supra. 

Pelagius:  "The  three  immersions  and  emersions  signify  death  and 
the  resurrection,"  ut  supra. 


496     TESTIMONY  OF  THE  COMMENTATORS  CONTINUED. 


All  these  so-called  "Fathers  of  the  Church"  unitedly 
represent  immersion  as  a  burial  with  Christ,  and  the 
reason  they  nearly  all  speak  of  trine  immersion,  is 
explained  by  the  fact  that  trine  immersion  was  intro- 
duced with  other  innovations  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
second  century,  at  least  one  hundred  years  after  the 
death  of  the  apostles,  and  the  practice  was  observed 
during  the  third  and  fourth  centuries,  especially  in  the 
churches  of  Africa,  whose  bishops  were  noted  for  mys- 
ticism and  theological  speculation.  Augustine,  of  the 
fourth  century,  says,  "that  thrice  repeated  submersion 
expresses  a  resemblance  of  the  Lord's  burial,"  ut  supra. 

Archbishop  Ckanmer  :  "  The  dipping  into  the  water  doth  betoken 
that  the  old  Adam,  with  all  his  sin  and  evil  lusts,  ought  to  be  drowned 
and  killed  by  daily  contrition  and  repentance.'' — Westlake,  eh.  3. 

Scuddee:  '  Baptism  doth  lively  represent  the  death,  burial,  and 
resurrection  of  Christ,  together  with  your  crucifying  the  affections  and 
lusts,  being  dead  and  buried  with  him  unto  sin,  and  rising  with  him 
to  newness  of  life  and  to  hope  of  glory.'' —  Wtitlake,  ch.  3. 

John  B.  Scudder  was  an  eminent  Presbyterian  divine, 
who  was  educated  in  Princeton  College,  and  who  died 
in  1876. 

Nicholson,  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  Exposition  of  Church  Catechism: 
"The  ancient  manner  of  baptizing  and  putting  tlie  person  baptized 
under  water  and  then  taking  him  out  again,  did  well  set  forth  these 
two  acts  :  the  first  his  dying,  the  second  his  rising  again.  In  our  bap- 
tism, by  a  kind  of  analogy  or  resemblance,  while  our  bodies  are  under 
the  water  we  may  be  said  to  be  buried  with  him,"  id  supra. 

Dr.  Manton,  Chaplain  to  the  King  of  England:  "The  putting  the 
baptized  person  into  the  water,  denoteth  and  proclaimeth  the  burial  of 
Christ,  and  we,  by  submitting  to  it,  are  buried  with  Lim,  or  profess  to 
be  dead  to  sin;  for  none  but  the  dead  are  buried;  so  that  it  signifieth 
Christ's  death  for  sin  and  our  death  imto  sin,"  ut  supra. 


SUPPLEMENTARY. 


SUPPLEMENTARY. 


INFANT  BAPTISM.  * 


BY  D.  B.  TXJRNEY,  A.  M. 

Th£  commission  of  Christ,  on  which  the  administration  of  water  bap- 
tism is  based,  is  found  in  tJie  Gospel  of  Matthew— the  only  gospel 
which  contains  the  baptismal  formula.  Does  that  commission,  cor- 
rectly construed,  require  the  baptism  of  infants?  An  affirmative 
answer  is  demanded  as  soon  as  a  true  translation  of  the  commission  is 
secured.  The  rendering  of  the  common  English  version  is  confessedly 
defective.  Correctness  of  translation  requires  that  the  verb  "teach" 
be  eliminated  in  favor  of  the  true  rendering,  "disciple."  Jesus  said  : 
"Go  and  discijile  all  the  nations  (neuter  plural),  baptizing  them 
(masculiot  plural)  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Iloiy  Suirit ;  teaching  them  (masculine  plural)  to  observe  every- 
thing which  I  have  commanded  you."  That  is  the  commission,  and  I 
have  noted  the  peculiar  gender  of  some  of  the  words,  according  to  the 
original,  which  is,  of  course,  the  authority  in  the  case.  The  noun 
"nations"  is  the  antecedent  of  the  pronoun  "them,"  which  agrees 
with  it  in  number  and  person  and  case,  yet  differs  from  it  in  gender, 
in  order  to  denote  distributive  relations,  which,  under  Greek  idiom, 
could  be  best  implied  in  that  way.  The  command,  "  Disciple  all  the 
nations,  baptizing  them,"  teaches  us  that  all  the  nations  distributively 
taken  are  to  be  discipled  by  baptism  ;  and  so  the  scholar  understands 
that  Jesus  commanded  his  followers  to  disciple  all  the  nations  by  bap- 
tiiing  the  individuals  of  whom  all  the  nations  consist.  A  failure  to  do 
this  is  a  failure  to  carry  out  the  commission. 

The  quibble  is  raised  that  such  a  construction  of  the  commission 
would  require  the  baptism  of  unregenerated  pagans  and  unrepentant 
infidels,  as  well  as  the  baptism  of  infants.  But  I  can  not  admit  this. 
Do  all  the  nations  consist  of  infidels,  pagans  and  impenitent  adults  7 
Not  by  considerable.    Are  adults  included  among  the  iadividuals  of 

Rejoinder  to  Bemarks  in  Ameriean  ChriHian  Review. 

(499) 


500 


IXFAXT  BAPTISM. 


whom  all  Ihe  nations  consist?  There  is  more  in  this  question  than  a, 
thoughtless  person  might  get  out  of  it.  Infidels  are  only  a  constituent 
element  in,  not  a  constitutive  element  of,  the  nations.  If  intideis  were 
to  all  abaiuloa  their  iulijLlity,  every  aatiou  would  be  im^uovod,  and 
no  nation  '.vould  be  blotted  out,  in  consequence  of  having  no  intideis. 

On  the  contrary,  infants  are  not  only  a  constituent  element  in  every 
nation,  but  are  likewise  a  constitutive  element  of  all  the  nations. 
Without  infants  no  nation  could  continue  to  exist.  Every  extinct 
tribe  gives  evidence  of  the  fact  to  the  obliteration  of  nations  in  conse- 
quence of  having  no  infants.  Infants  are  not  merely  a  portion  of  all 
the  nations,  in  the  sense  of  being  found  in  every  nation  ;  but  they  are 
the  formative  organic  element — they  compose  all  the  nations,  and  of 
infants  all  nations  consist,  in  the  sense  that  no  nation  would  or  could 
exist  without  them,  and  in  the  additional  sense  that  all  adults  have 
been  infants.  Here  is  a  point,  sure  enough,  which  the  Savior  at  least 
did  not  ignore.  Infants,  not  adults,  elementally  and  essentially,  con- 
stitute all  the  nations  ;  and  baptizing  all  infants  would  ritually  "  dis- 
ciple all  the  nations."  In  this  fact  I  find  reason  to  justify  me  in 
concluding  that  Jesus,  in  the  commission,  required  the  baptism  of 
infants.  The  phrase,  "  aU  the  nations,"  is  in  the  accusative  case  in 
the  commission.  If  any  restriction  of  its  reference  can  be  found  in 
the  immediate  connection,  or  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  I  would  be 
grateful  to  the  person  who  is  able  and  willing  to  logically  show  what 
restriction  is  included;  for  until  I  can  show  a  restriction  under  which 
to  shut  out  the  infants,  I  have  no  option,  and  must  retain  them  as 
scriptural  subjects  of  baptism.  If  a  law  were  adopted  forbidding 
adults  to  be  baptized,  yet  tolerating  the  baptism  of  infants,  it  would 
still  be  possible  to  "disciple  all  nations,  baptizing  them"  ;  for  the 
unbaptized  adults  would  die  off,  and  the  baptized  infants  would  grow 
up,  until,  in  each  and  every  nation,  it  would  come  to  pass  that  all 
individuals  would  be  discipled  by  baptism,  as  surely  as  it  comes  to 
pass  that  one  generation  of  adults  is  succeeded  by  another  in  consi"- 
quence  of  infants  attaining  adultship.  But  if  a  law  were  adopted  for- 
bidding infants  to  be  baptized,  yet  encouraging  the  baptism  of  adults, 
it  would  be  utterly  out  of  the  question  to  "  disciple  all  nations,  baptiz- 
ing" ;  for  the  greater  portion  of  all  nations  would  be  denied  baptism. 
Infants  outnumber  adults  in  every  nation  which  is  not  literally  on  the 
road  to  extinction.  And,  in  spite  of  the  mortality  of  infants,  by  which 
fully  half  of  all  who  are  born  die  within  the  first  year  from  birth,  the 
ratio  of  increase  is  so  gre:it  that  the  adult  ranks  are  augmented  as  well 
as  replenished  by  the  growing  up  of  those  who  survive.    Hence,  adult 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


501 


•baptism  can  not  ritually  "disciple  all  the  nations."  It  would  leave 
the  greater  portion  of  all  nations  undiscipled  by  baptism,  even  if 
administered  to  every  adult  without  exception  or  limitation.  Did  not 
our  Lord  understand  this  fact  far  better  than  we  can  ?  I  think  so. 
Jesus  said  :  "Go  and  disciple  all  the  nations,  baptizing  them."  Had 
it  been  proper  to  disciple  all  nations,  teaching  them  first  and  baptizing 
them  afterward,  the  wisdom  of  the  Redeemer  would  surely  have  so 
instructed  us.  But  the  commission  places  baptizing  before  teaching  ; 
"  Ba])tizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I 
have  commanded  you."  In  doing  this,  it  makes  the  baptism  of  infants 
occupy  a  better  basis  than  that  of  adults,  so  far  as  the  order  of  the 
commission  is  concerned.  Nor  is  this  fact  weakened  by  an  appeal  to 
the  language  :  "Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations;"  where  the 
word  rendered  "teach"  properly  means  "disciple,"  and  is  from  a 
-different  root  altogetlier.  The  fact  that  the  commission  requires  bap- 
tizing before  teaching,  and  the  fact  that  infants  are  baptized  before 
they  are  taught,  will  surely  show  that  Jesus  worded  the  commission  in 
a  manner  that  can  not  displease  the  advocate  of  infant  baptism.  A 
fact  may  rest  on  legitimate  inference  as  securely  as  upon  the  most 
explicit  declaration.  The  order  of  the  commission  in  putting  the  bap- 
tizing them  in  advance  of  the  instructing  them,  implies  a  design  on 
Christ's  part  to  promote  the  baptism  of  infants. 

The  impossibility  of  discipling  all  the  nations  without  baptizing 
infants,  and  the  certainty  that  all  the  nations  would  ritually  be  disci- 
pled  by  the  universal  prevalence  of  infant  baptism,  and  the  added  fact 
that  the  very  order  of  mention  in  the  commission  specifies  "  baptizing 
them"  before  "teaching  them,"  may  not  be  considerations  of  much 
weight  with  unrefiective  bigots ;  but  I  feel  sure  that  these  considera- 
tions will  weigh  with  every  real  lover  of  God's  word.  If  Christ  has 
authorized  the  baptism  of  infants — and  the  commission  itself  affords 
fair  evidence  that  he  has — the  path  of  duty  seems  to  me  to  be  suffi- 
ciently plain  without  extended  discussion.  As  a  father,  I  should  sub- 
mit my  child  to  the  ordinance  of  disciplement  by  baptism.  To  refuse 
to  do  that,  is  to  lift  my  puny  arm  in  rebellion  against  my  Master.  He 
did  not  say:  "Disciple  the  believer  only,  baptizing  him,"  etc.  He 
was  too  wise  to  put  upon  his  human  servants  the  task  of  weighing  the 
faith  of  a  fellow-creature ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  has  required  each 
])er8on,  as  he  grows  in  knowledge,  to  act  according  to  the  measure  of 
his  faith,  on  behalf  of  his  own  house,  or  offspring,  as  really  as  on  his 
own  behalf.    He  said:  "Disciple  all  the  nations,  baptizing  them." 


502 


-NFANT  BAPTISM. 


He  requires  the  disciplement  of  every  creature,  ritually  at,  or  soon 
after,  birth,  and  rationally  as  soon  as  the  dawning  reason  makes  teach- 
ing a  possibility.    Thus  the  commission,  correctly  construed,  is  the 
bulwark  of  infant  haptism. 
Peru,  111. 


ANSWER  AGAIN. 

Our  friend  Turney  holds  on  to  the  Great  Commission 
with  the  desperate  grip  of  death,  for  he  very  well  knows 
that  if  he  loses  the  commission,  he  loses  all.  It  is  his 
dernier  resort.  It  is  the  last  peg  on  which  to  hang  a 
hope.  If  this  text  vanishes  into  thin  air,  he  will,  like 
every  other  baby  baptist,  find  himself  building  upon  the 
baseless  fabric  of  a  vision. 

1.  When  he  asserts  that  "the  Gospel  of  Matthew  is 
the  only  gospel  that  contains  the  baptismal  formula," 
he  asserts  what  is  not  true  ;  for,  according  to  Mark,  it 
reads,  ' '  Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  gospel 
to  every  creature ;  he  that  beliroetJi  and  is  baptized  shall 
be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned." 
Mr.  Turney  will  not  receive  this  formula,  because  it 
contains  the  words  "preach"  and  "believe";  and  why 
not  receive  it?  Because  he  knows  that  he  can  not  preach 
to  infants,  and  also  because  he  knows  that  infants  can 
not  believe  the  gospel.  Now  where  is  he  ?  Would  he, 
in  order  to  carry  a  point,  undertake  to  make  Mark  cofi- 
tradict  Matthew  ?  Such  is  hi';  desperation,  in  a  lost 
cause,  that  he  would  actually  attempt  to  make  the  Holy 
Spirit  contradict  his  own  words !  For  was  not  Mark  as 
infallibly  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit  as  was  Matthew? 
But  Mark  does  not  contradict  Matthew,  as  we  shall  see. 

2.  He  says  the  word  "nations"  is  "neuter  plural." 
Very  well,  then,  as  nations  separately  are  in  the  "  neuter 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


gender,"  and  are  not  personal,  including  male  and 
female,  he  must,  to  be  consistent  with  his  own  rule  of 
grammar,  baptize  each  nation  as  one  individual  and  sepa- 
rately!  We  would  like  to  see  him  baptize  a  nation. 
The  only  way  he  could  do  it  would  be  to  make  an  infant 
the  representative  of  a  nation,  and  then  baptize  the 
enfant  terrible!  The  idea  of  baptizing  a  neuter  gender — a 
neuter  thing — did  you  ever ! 

3.  Says  Mr.  Turney,  A.M.:  "Jesus  said,  'Go  and 
disciple  all  the  nations  (neuter  plural),  baptizing  them 
(masculine  plural)  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  teaching  them 
(masculine  plural)  to  observe  everything  which  I  have 
commanded  you.'"  According  to  this  novel  interpre- 
tation (which  "  beats  the  Jews  "),  after  he  has  baptized 
the  "neuter"  nations,  which  have  neither  masculine 
nor  feminine  gender,  he  would  then  baptize  only  the 
"masculine"  part  of  the  nations;  thus  (without  lexical 
authority  or  any  other  kind  of  authority)  changing  the 
neuter  into  the  masculine  gender,  while  he  at  the  same 
time  excludes  the  female  portion  of  the  nations  from  the 
covenant  of  God's  grace !  Whoever  heard  of  a  nation 
without  females  in  it?  First,  nations  are  neuter  gender 
before  they  are  baptized,  but  after  they  are  baptized  they 
are  masculine  gender  —  minus  the  feminine  gender! 
Mr.  Turney,  A.M.,  would  do  well  to  brush  up  his 
knowledge  of  Greek  syntax,  before  making  such  a  dis- 
play of  grammatical  wisdom. 

4.  "Common  English  version  is  confessedly  defec- 
tive. Correctness  of  translation  requires  that  the  verb 
'  teach '  be  eliminated  in  favor  of  the  true  rendering, 
'disciple.'"  So  says  Mr.  Turney,  A.M.  We  accept 
the  elimination  with  joy  and  alacrity,  because  Ai.i  xan- 


504 


INFANT  BAPTISM. 


DER  Campbell  contended  all  his  lifetime  for  that  render- 
ing of  the  passage,  and  so  have  all  our  best  scholars  and 
leading  men.  This  rendering  only  plunges  our  friend 
into  deeper  difificulties.  The  Greek  lexicons  must 
determine  the  meaning  of  the  Greek  representative  of 
"disciple."  And  here  are  the  definitions  of  /ua^^zeuco, 
matherteuo,  as  given  by  Edward  Robinson  (one  of  the 
highest  Greek  authorities)  in  his  work  entitled,  "Greek 
and  English  Lexicon  of  the  New  Testament."  i. 
Intrans. ,  To  be  the  disciple  of  atty  one.  2.  Trans.,  To 
train  as  a  disciple,  to  teach,  to  instruct.  The  definitions 
of  the  noun  fiad^r^zf]:;,  matheetees,  are  these :  a  disciple, 
scholar,  follower  of  a  teacher ;  and  "after  Christ's  death 
the  term  disciple  takes  the  broader  sense  of  follower, 
believer. ' ' 

Grove,  in  his  Greek  and  English  Dictionary,  defines 
the  word  as  follows  :  "To  teach,  to  instruct,  make  con- 
verts or  disciples,  to  learn,  to  become  a  scholar."  And 
Grove,  mind  you,  was  one  of  the  rankest  of  pedobap- 
tists.  In  view  of  these  definitions,  it  is  plain  to  be  seen 
that  teachers  teach,  and  that  disciples  learn.  Mr.  Tur- 
ney  says  "that  all  the  nations  distributively  taken  are 
to  be  discipled  by  baptism."  This  is  pure  and  undefiled 
assumption,  for  the  reason  that  baptism  is  not  contained 
in  the  definition  of  viathectcuo.  Dare  he  say  that  bap- 
tism is  one  of  the  meanings  of  this  Greek  word?  By 
implication  he  actually  says  so,  and  that,  too,  in  opposi- 
tion to  every  Greek  lexicon  in  the  world.  If  this  is  not 
a  willful  perversion  of  the  truth,  then  what  is  it  ?  The 
idea  itself  of  baptism  is  not  found  in  the  Greek  word 
fia^Tjxzuco,  and  Mr.  Turney  knows  it ;  and  if  he  don't 
know  it,  why  does  he  parade  the  literary  title  A.M.? 
Titles  must  be  cheap  where  he  liyes.    If  matheeteuo 


REFOKMATORV  MOVEMENTS. 


means  baptism^  then  baptism  means  to  teach,  because 
the  definitions  of  a  word  are  always  equal  to  the  word 
defined,  and  every  tyro  in  Greek  knows  that  baptism 
{baptize)  does  not  mean  to  teach  or  to  instruct. 

5.  Can  an  infant,  that  possesses  neither  reason  nor 
instinct,  be  instructed,  taught,  be  made  a  disciple  of 
Christ  by  following  Christ?  Mr.  Turney  is  rooting 
around  among  the  roots  of  the  old  Jewish  covenant  of 
circumcision,  and  evidently  trying  to  confound  the 
fleshly  covenant  of  the  Jews  with  the  spiritual  covenant 
of  the  New  Dispensation.  We  challenge  him  to  pro- 
duce one  scholar  out  of  the  entire  literary  world  who 
says  that  matheeteuo  means  baptism.  We  know  that  he 
can  not  do  it,  and  therefore  his  case  is  as  hopeless  as  it 
is  helpless.  He  might  just  as  well  assume  that  mathee- 
teuo means  soothing  syrup,  or  that  it  means  polyglott,  or 
that  "  pussy  wants  a  corner." 

6.  "Jesus  commanded  his  followers  to  disciple  all  the 
nations  (distributively)  by  baptizing  the  individuals  of 
•whom  all  the  nations  consist."  Why,  sir,  if  you  dis- 
tribute "  the  nations,"  do  they  not  (  "distributively  ") 
become  single,  individual  nations?  If  so,  by  your  own 
process  of  reasoning,  you  must  go  to  work,  and  by 
physical  force  baptize  the  individual  nations.  Your  dis- 
tributive argument  is  exceedingly  fallacious.  But  you 
say  you  mcin  that  individuals  must  be  baptized,  accord- 
ing to  the  command  of  Christ?  If  you  are  a  follower 
of  Christ,  and  Christ  has  commanded  his  followers  to 
disciple  all  nations,  why  don't  you  obey  this  positive 
command?  Why  don't  you  begin  your  force  work 
immediately,  by  hailing  men  and  women  on  the  streets, 
and  baptizing  them  against  their  choice  and  will?  by 
stopping  boys  and  girls  on  their  way  to  school,  and  bap- 


5o6 


INFANT  BAPTISM. 


tizing  them  against  all  their  recalcitrant  actions?  by 
pitching  pell-mell  into  your  neighbor's  house,  and  bap- 
tizing nations  by  baptizing  helpless,  guileless,  sinless, 
willless,  non-intelligent,  non-resistant  babes?  Why 
don't  you  go  about  your  business,  sir,  and,  with  the  aid 
of  a  church  posse  comitatus,  baptize  infidels,  skeptics, 
murderers,  whoremongers,  harlots,  pickpockets,  gam- 
blers and  all?  For,  are  not  these  a  part  of  "all 
nations"?  And  if  you  can  baptize  infants  without  their 
will  or  consent,  and  without  knowledge,  why  can  you 
not  baptize  all  the  characters  we  have  named  above, 
provided  you  can  procure  sufficient  physical  force  to 
bring  them  down  into  the  water?  For,  as  between 
infants  and  infidels,  it  is  only  a  question  of  degree,  and 
not  a  difference  in  the  nature  of  the  work.  All  nations 
have  not  been  baptized  in  the  past ;  all  nations  are  not 
baptized  in  the  present.  And  why?  Has  the  church 
neglected  to  baptize  all  nations?  If  you  can  baptize 
infants  without  their  consent,  why  not  baptize  men  and 
women  without  their  consent?  The  main  thing  is  to 
get  them  all  baptized,  and  after  baptism  teach  them. 
If  you  can  baptize  an  infant  without  faith,  you  can  also 
baptize  "  children  of  a  larger  growth"  without  faith  or 
reformation.  Is  it  possible  that  Mr.  Turney,  A.M., 
teaches  baptismal  regeneration?  So  it  seems.  In  the 
language  of  Mr.  Turney,  "There  is  more  in  this  ques- 
tion than  a  thoughtless  person  might  get  out  of  it." 

7.  "Infidels  are  only  a  constituent  element  in,  not  a 
constitutive  element  of,  the  nations  !"  In  the  name  of 
goodness,  what  does  the  man  mean  by  this?  Let  us 
see.  Infidels  are  only  a  constituent  element  in,  not  a 
constitutive  element  of,  the  United  States.  "Constitu- 
ent "  and  "  constitutive  "  are  both  adjectives — qualifying 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


507 


adjectives — and  mean  precisely  the  same  thing.  Web- 
ster will  please  come  forward  and  testify,  by  giving  the 
definitions  of  both  words. 

Constituent,  I.  The  person  or  thing  which  establishes, 
determines  or  constructs.  2.  That  which  constitutes  or 
composes,  as  a  part  or  an  essential  part ;  a  component  j 
an  element. 

CoTistitutive,  I.  Tending  or  assisting  to  constitute, 
form  or  compose ;  elemental ;  essential.  2.  Having 
power  to  enact,  establish  or  create  ;  instituting. 

The  only  difference  between  the  two  words  is  the  fact 
that  "constituent"  is  derived  from  the  Latin,  while 
"constitutive"  is  derived  from  the  Italian  and  the  Span- 
ish. The  difference  between  the  two  terms  is  not 
enough  to  make  Mr.  Turney,  A.M.,  "walk  Spanish." 
He  must  have  intended  to  throw  dust  in  the  eyes  of  his 
readers.  Such  tampering  with  words  is  worthy  of  Jesu- 
istical  casuistry.  It  is  a  metaphysical  jugglery.  To 
paraphrase  one  of  his  sentences  :  ' '  Infants  are  not  only 
a  constituent  element  in  every  nation,  but  are  likewise  a 
constituent  element  of  all  the  nations !  "  This  is  not 
only  tautology,  but  it  is  absolute  nonsense.  A  man 
must  be  in  a  terrible  predicament  who  will  resort  to  such 
transparent  artifices.  A  Scotch  blacksmith,  being  asked 
the  meaning  of  "metaphysics,"  explained  it  as  follows: 
"  When  the  party  that  listens  dinna  ken  what  the  party 
speaks  means,  and  the  party  who  speaks  dinna  ken  what 
he  means — that  is  metaphysics." 


BAPTISM  OF  INFANTS. 


One  of  GUI'  preaching  brethren  in  Dakota  has  sent  us 
a  tract,  which  is  being  freely  circulated  in  that  country, 
entitled  "The  Baptism  of  Infants  a  Christian  Duty,'" 
by  Rev.  H.  G.  Bilbie,  which,  as  to  assumption,  pre- 
sumption, special  pleading,  specious  plausibility  and 
begging  of  the  question,  excels  anything  of  the  kind 
we  have  seen  since  the  day  when  the  Disciples  of  Christ 
were  more  positive  and  aggressive  than  they  are  now. 
With  all  our  varied  and  large  accumulation  of  literature 
on  all  possible  biblical  subjects,  including  bocks  and 
debates  and  tracts,  it  seems  somewhat  remarkable  that 
we  have  not  a  tract  extant  on  the  subject  of  "Infant 
Baptism. " 

I.  The  author  of  the  tract  before  us,  in  his  defense 
of  the  rite,  first  appeals  to  the  fact  that  out  of  the  num- 
ber of  ninety-seven  million  Protestants,  there  are  ninety- 
four  million  who  "indorse  the  practice."  He  might 
have  add^d  that  there  are  two  hundred  million  Roman 
Catholics  and  seventy  million  Greek  Catholics  who 
"indorse  the  practice."  If  numerical  strength  has  any 
argument  in  it,  then  it  will  be  quite  easy  to  prove  that 
popery,  auricular  confession,  the  mass,  the  burning  of 
wax  candles,  celibacy,  purgatory  and  priestly  absolution 
are  of  divine  origin  and  authorized  by  the  Word  of  God. 
Brahminism  and  Buddhism,  which  represent  thousands 
of  millions,  could  be  proved  to  be  of  divine  origin  by  the 
same  method  of  argumentation.    Rev.  Bilbie  must  be 

(SO) 


R  EFO R M ATO R Y  MOV li M  KNTS. 


309 


hard  pushed  to  resort  to  the  argument  of  numbers.  The 
devil  could  rival  him  in  that  sort  of  a  logical  process. 

2.  His  second  argument  is  "an  appeal  to  history" — 
to  the  fathers  of  the  Church,  who  began  to  write  theo- 
logical works  toward  the  close  of  the  second  century 
and  down  to  the  fifth  century;  which  theological  writing 
and  mystical  speculation  synchronize  with  the  introduc- 
tion and  prevalence  of  the  innovations  which  inaugura- 
ted the  great  apostasy  of  the  Dark  Ages.  And  this 
"appeal "  he  makes  in  face  of  the  fact  that  there  is  not 
one  sclwlar  in  a  thousand  at  the  present  day  who  pre- 
sumes to  trace  infant  baptism  back  to  the  age  of  the 
apostles.  Says  Rev.  Bilbie  :  "In  the  sixteenth  century 
Cassander  writes  '  that  all  France,  Spain,  Germany  and 
Italy,  and  all  Europe,  has  had  never  a  person  baptized 
now  for  three  hundred,  or  almost  five  hundred,  years 
otherwise  than  in  infancy; '  and  history  is  destitute  of 
any  well-established  fact  to  oppose  to  even  so  sweeping 
a  statement  as  this.  From  the  eighth  century  back  to 
the  middle  of  the  third  there  can  be  but  one  opinion  as 
to  the  universal  prevalence  of  the  practice  throughout 
all  the  branches  of  the  Christian  Church.  If,  then, 
baptism  is  an  innovation  [he  means  infant  baptism,  we 
presume],  it  must  have  occurred  during  the  first  three 
centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  But  what  has  history  to 
say  upon  this  important  point?" 

Why,  sir,  "history"  has  this  to  say:  That  infant 
baptism  was  first  talked  about  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
second  century;  that  it  began  to  be  advocated  in  the 
third  century;  that  its  introduction  was  vigorously 
opposed  by  some  of  the  most  talented  men  of  the 
times  (notably  Tertullian);  that  it  was  practiced  in  the 
fourth  and  fifth  centuries  against  continuous  protesta- 


510 


BAPTISM  OF  rXFANTS. 


tions  [and  if  it  was  not  an  innovation,  why  was  it  so  per- 
sistently opposed  so  near  to  the  age  of  the  apostles  ?], 
that  the  practice  was  adopted  and  perpetuated  by  heret- 
ical teachers  in  the  same  years  when  metropolitan  bish- 
ops began  to  assume  an  ecclesiastical  authority  that 
destroyed  the  individuality  and  independency  of  the 
congregations;  and  in  those  years  when  the  Papacy, 
with  all  its  flummeries  and  departures  from  the  original 
faith,  began  to  develop  and  shape  itself  for  the  Dark 
Ages.  "History"  informs  us  that,  during  the  entire 
period  of  the  Dark  Ages,  immersion  was  not  practiced — 
was  unheard  of,  except  in  very  rare  instances — but,  on 
the  contrary,  that  the  sprinkling  of  infants  was  the  gen- 
eral practice,  and  that  the  denser  the  darkness  of  the 
age,  the  denser  the  superstition  that  attached  to  the  rite 
of  infant  baptism. 

The  Rev.  Bilbie  makes  some  curious,  and  we  may  say 
self-condemning  statements,  as  for  instance :  "St.  Aus- 
tin wrote  a  history  of  all  denominations  [McClintock  & 
Strong  in  their  Encyclopedia  say  nothing  about  such  a 
history]  about  A.  D.  420.  [How  a  man  could  write  a 
history  of  all  denominations  about  A.  D.  420,  who 
was  not  born  till  the  sixth  century,  wc  utterly  fail  to 
see.]  Among  these  he  includes  eighty-eight  heresies, 
but  omits  infant  baptism  from  the  list."  And  why  did 
he  omit  infant  baptism  from  the  list?  For  the  good 
reason  that  he  could  not  place  on  record  that  which  had 
no  existence  i>i  fact.  Then  Rev.  Bilbie  asks  the  ques- 
rion,  "Is  it  reasonable  to  affirm  that  all  trace  of  the 
introduction  of  the  practice  into  the  church  had  in  less 
than  four  centuries  so  completely  faded  from  history 
that  he  should  classify  it  with  the  acknowledged  Chris- 
tian rites  by  mistake  or  ignorance?"    We  ask,  How 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS 


511 


could  a  thing  fade  from  history  that  was  not  recorded  in 
history?  Whoever  before  heard  that  the  omission  to 
mention  a  thing  proved  the  existence  of  the  thing?  He 
further  says:  "The  universahty  of  the  practice  in  the 
beginning  of  the  fifth  century  is  proved  by  a  decree  of 
a  council  held  in  Carthage  in  418.  Two  hundred  and 
^fourteen  bishops  were  in  attendance,  and  they  wrote : 
'Also  we  determine  that  whoever  does  deny  that  infants 
may  be  baptized  when  they  come  recently  from  their 
mother's  womb,    ...    let  him  be  anathema.'" 

Why  was  it  a  universal  practice  in  the  fifth  century 
and  not  in  the  first  century?  And  why  did  it  become 
necessary  for  this  Carthage  council  to  pass  such  a 
decree  ?  Did  the  apostles  ever  pass  such  a  decree  ? 
Did  Christ  or  the  apostles  authorize  these  two  hundred 
and  fourteen  bishops  to  pass  this  decree  ?  Is  there  any- 
thing in  the  New  Testament  like  it?  In  the  fifth  century 
the  church  fathers,  such  as  Rev.  Bilbie  cites,  began  to 
speculate  about  the  existence  of  a  purgatory.  It  was  at 
the  Council  of  Toledo  (A.  D.  400)  that  the  bishop  of 
Rome  was  for  the  first  time  spoken  of  simply  by  the 
title  of  "  Pope."*  In  A  D.  417  the  custom  of  hallow- 
ing paschal  candles  on  Easter  was  commanded  by  Gosi- 
mus,  and  ordered  to  be  practiced  in  every  church.  In 
431  the  first  law  was  passed  granting  asylum  in  churches 
to  fugitives  from  justice.  Mr.  Elliott,  in  his  Horcz 
Apocalypticce,  assigns  this  as  the  date  when  the  bishop 
of  Rome  distinctly  assumed  the  "keys"  as  a  symbol 
of  ecclesiastical  power.  The  invocation  of  saints  was 
introduced  A.  D.  470,  by  Peter  Gnapheous,  patriarch 
of  Antioch,  and  ordered  that  the  "Mother  of  God" 


•See  Landon's  Manual  of  Councils.    Ijondon,  1846,  p.  578. 


512 


BAPTISM  OF  INFANTS. 


should  be  used  in  every  prayer  and  in  every  church. 
We  have  the  authorities  before  us,  if  these  statements 
are  doubted. 

Now  will  Rev.  Bilbie  accept  of  these  false  dogmas 
and  corruptions  of  primitive  Christianity  because  they 
were  introduced  in  the  fifth  century  and  recorded  in  the 
annals  of  the  fifth  century?  The  Romanists  quote  the 
Greek  and  early  Roman  fathers  of  the  first  four  centuries 
in  proof  of  monastic  life — the  celibacy  of  the  clergy — the 
merit  of  perpetual  virginity — the  pontificate  of  Peter  in 
Rome — atid  infant  communion.'^  As  the  question  of 
infant  baptism  must  be  established  by  the  apostles  of 
Jesus  Christ,  his  accredited  embassadors  to  the  world, 
both  Jew  and  Gentile,  of  what  avail  is  the  array  of  so 
many  post-apostolic  names — the  names  of  uninspired 
men — such  as  Origen,  Irenjeus,  Justin  Martyr,  Polycarp, 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  Cyprian,  et  al.f  If  Polycarp 
and  others,  who  almost  touched  the  apostles,  ever 
asserted  that  infant  baptism  was  practiced  in  the  age  of 
the  apostles,  why  does  not  Rev.  Bilbie  quote  the  lan- 
guage of  these  eminent  men,  and  give  us  book,  chapter 
and  section,  instead  of  affirming  what  he  can  not  prove, 
or  what  he  does  not  attempt  to  prove  ?  And  if  these 
distinguished  fathers  opposed  infant  baptism,  standing 
so  near  the  apostles,  why  did  they  object  to  infant  bap- 
tism as  a  heresy  or  innovation  ?  How  could  these 
"heretical  writers,"  as  Bilbie  calls  them,  interpose 
objections  to  infant  baptism  if  the  rite  was  "univer- 
sally practiced?"  Here  is  a  palpable  contradiction, 
and  our  sanguine  advocate  of  a  senseless  rite  must 
swallow  the  dose.    The  very  fact  that,  in  that  early  age 


*Polydore  Vergil,  B.  VI.,  v.,  p.  120.    London,  1551. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


of  the  Church,  the  innovation  was  opposed,  is  not  only 
presumptive,  not  only  probable,  but  positive  evidence 
that  adult  immersion  was  the  universal  apostolic  prac- 
tice. And  yet,  in  the  face  of  this  fact,  Bilbie  has  the 
1  presumption  to  assert  that  "the  objection  of  a  heretic 
amounts  to  conclusive  proof  of  the  existence  of  that 
to  which  objection  is  made!"  If  infant  baptism  was 
"universally  practiced,"  will  our  friend  tell  wJiy  these 
"heretical  writers"  objected  to  the  heresy.^  There 
must  be  ground  for  every  objection.  What  was  the 
ground  of  their  objection  ?  It  was  either  the  Word  of 
God  blazing  before  their  eyes,  or  it  was  a  pure  myth  or 
a  vain  imagination.  Now,  which  was  it?  Before  closing 
this  article,  let  us  hear  what  Dean  Stanley,  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  a  typical  representative  of  the 
whole  pedobaptist  world,  has  to  say  on  the  subject  of 
infant  baptism.  After  a  thorough,  searching  investiga- 
tion of  the  subject,  he  says : 

Another  change  is  not  so  complete,  but  is  perhaps  more  important. 
In  the  apostolic  age,  and  in  the  three  centuries  which  followed,  it  is 
evident  that,  as  a  general  rule,  those  who  came  to  baptism  came  in  full 
age,  and  of  their  own  deliberate  choice.  We  find  a  few  cases  of  the 
baptism  of  children ;  in  the  third  century  we  find  one  case  of  the  bap- 
tism of  infants.  Even  amongst  Christian  households  tlie  instances  of 
Chrysostom,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Basil,  Ephrem  of  Edessa,  Augustine, 
Ambrose,  are  decisive  proofs  that  it  was  not  only  not  obligatory,  but 
not  usual.  They  had  Christian  parents,  and  yet  they  were  not  bap- 
tized till  they  reached  maturity.  The  liturgical  service  of  baptism 
was  framed  entirely  for  full-grown  converts,  and  is  only  by  considera- 
ble adaptation  applied  to  the  case  of  infants.  Gradually,  however, 
the  practice  spread,  and  after  the  fifth  century  the  whole  Christian 
world,  East  and  West,  Catholic  and  Protestant,  Episcopal  and  Presby- 
terian (with  the  single  exception  of  the  sect  of  the  Baptists  before 
mentioned),  have  baptized  children  in  their  infancy.  Whereas,  in  the 
early  ages,  adult  baptism  was  the  rule,  and  infant  baptism  the  excep- 
tion, in  later  times  infant  baptism  ie  the  rule,  and  adult  baptism  the 

34 


514 


BAPTISM  OF  INFANTS. 


exception.  What  is  the  justification  of  this  almost  universal  depart- 
ure from  the  primitive  usages?  There  may  have  been  many  reasons, 
some  bad,  some  good.  One,  no  doubt,  was  the  sn[)erstitiou8  feeling 
already  mentioned,  which  regarded  baptism  as  a  clianu,  indispensable 
to  salvation,  and  which  insisted  on  imparting  it  to  every  human  being 
who  could  be  touched  with  water,  however  unconscious.  Hence  the 
eagerness  with  which  Roman  Catholic  missionaries,  like  St.  Francis 
Xavier,  have  made  it  the  chief  glory  of  tlieir  mission  to  have  baptized 
heathen  populations  wholesale,  in  utter  Ui.sregard  of  the  primitive  or 
Protestant  practice  of  previous  preparation.*  Hence  the  capture  of 
children  for  baptism  without  the  consent  of  their  parents,  as  in  the 
celebrated  case  of  the  Jewish  boy,  Mortara.  Hence  the  curious 
decision  of  the  Sorbonne  quoted  in  Tristram  Shandy.  Hence  in  the 
early  centuries,  and  still  in  the  Eastern  Churches,  co-extensive  with 
infant  baptism,  the  practice  of  infant  communion,  both  justified  on 
the  same  grounds,  and  both  based  on  the  mechanical  application  of 
biblical  texts  to  cases  which  by  their  very  nature  were  not  contemplated 
in  the  apostolic  age. 

Speaking  of  the  "changes"  which  took  place  in  the 
post-apostoHc  age,  Dean  Stanley  says :  "Such  changes 
on  such  a  momentous  subject  are  the  most  encoura- 
ging lessons  of  ecclesiastical  history.  They  show  how 
variable  and  contradictor}',  and  therefore  how  capable  of 
improvement,  has  been  the  theology  of  the  Catholic  as 
well  as  of  the  Protestant  churches,  and  how  great, 
therefore,  are  the  hopes  of  the  future  of  both  " — italics 
ours.  Again  he  says:  "It  remains  an  instructive  exam- 
ple of  the  facility  and  silence  with  which,  in  matters  of 
form,  even  the  greatest  changes  can  be  effected  without 
,any  senous  loss  to  Christian  truth,  and  with  great  advan- 
tage to  Christian  solemnity  and  edification.  The  substi- 
iution  of  sprinkling  for  immersion  must  to  many  at  the 
time,  as  to  the  Baptists  now,  have  seemed  the  greatest 
and  most  dangerous  innovation.''    And  yet  Dean  Stanley 

*See  a  powerful  description  of  this  mode  of  baptism  in  Lord  Elgin's 
"  Life  and  Letters,"  edited  by  Theodore  Walrond,  p.  338. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


and  Rev.  Bilbie  dare  to  change  one  of  the  positive  ordi- 
nances of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  Again  says 
the  lordly  Dean  :  *  *  The,  substitution  of  infant  baptism  for 
adult  baptism,  like  the  change  from  immersion  to  sprinkling, 
is  thus  a  triumph  of  Christian  charity  " — italics  ours. 


Date  Due 

1 

 1 

i 

',,1 

■  -"I       '  c 

 H 

 1 



